Sum and Chia and Ors

In the Family Court of Australia, Ms Sum (the wife) sought leave to adduce expert evidence in proceedings against Mr Chia (the husband) and several other respondents, including companies and trusts. The dispute concerned a property division and the setting aside of certain transactions under section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth). The wife's application for leave was initially granted by a registrar, prompting the husband to seek a review of that decision.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the wife should be granted leave to adduce expert evidence, particularly given the proximity of the substantive property trial and the existence of a single expert witness in the case. The Court was required to consider the wife's need for expert evidence to explain complex transactions, the husband's submissions that alternative methods of presenting evidence existed, and the requirements of the *Family Law Rules 2004* (Cth) concerning the adducing of expert evidence, specifically Rule 15.51 which requires permission to adduce expert evidence other than through a single expert.

Justice Cronin reasoned that the overarching principle in such interlocutory applications must be the achievement of justice. While acknowledging the husband's arguments regarding the proposed witness's expertise and the potential for alternative evidence presentation, the Court adopted a liberal approach to the rules, emphasising that the ultimate admissibility of the evidence would be determined at trial. The Court found that the wife had sufficiently demonstrated the necessity for expert evidence to explain complex documents, that attempts to agree on a single expert had been unsuccessful due to the adversarial nature of the proceedings, and that the proposed evidence was relevant to the issues in dispute. The Court noted that the focus should be on the content of the evidence and the issues it addresses, rather than strictly on the specific witness named.

The Court ordered that the wife be granted leave to adduce expert evidence in relation to the documents giving rise to the transactions relevant to the application for orders under section 106B of the *Family Law Act 1975*. Consequently, the husband's application for a review of the registrar's decision was dismissed, as was the wife's application filed on 19 February 2013. Costs for the day were reserved to the trial judge.