Watson and Watson (No 2)

In *Watson & Watson (No. 2)*, the Family Court of Australia considered an application by the wife for leave to adduce evidence from an adversarial expert, Mr N, concerning the valuation of the parties' businesses. The husband opposed this application, particularly in light of a previously appointed single joint expert, Mr M, whose report had not attributed any goodwill to the businesses. The trial concerning final parenting and property issues was scheduled to commence shortly.

The primary legal issues before the Court were whether to grant the wife leave to rely on Mr N's report as adversarial expert evidence, despite the existence of a single expert's report, and whether Mr N's report met the requirements of the Family Law Rules 2004, particularly concerning objectivity and the basis of his opinions. The Court also considered objections raised by the husband regarding Mr N's qualifications, the process of his engagement, and the admissibility of his opinion in light of the decision in *Dasreef Pty Ltd v Hawchar*.

Her Honour Dessau J reasoned that while the Family Law Rules generally favour the use of single expert witnesses to avoid unnecessary costs, they also permit parties to apply for permission to tender reports from their own experts if necessary in the interests of justice. The Court found that Mr N possessed the requisite expertise to value businesses and goodwill, and that while there were technical breaches of the Rules, such as oral instructions and lack of husband input, these were matters for cross-examination rather than outright exclusion. The Court was not satisfied that Mr N's report was inadmissible based on the "assumption rule" as articulated in *Dasreef*, noting that the plurality in that case did not definitively establish such a rule at common law. Furthermore, the Court considered that the issue of goodwill was substantial and important enough to warrant the admission of adversarial expert evidence in the interests of justice, allowing the wife to "mend her hand" by providing further evidentiary basis for Mr N's assumptions.

The Court ordered that the wife have leave to adduce the evidence of Mr N as the evidence of an adversarial expert, subject to certain conditions regarding the provision of communications between the wife, her solicitors, and Mr N. The husband was granted leave to file and serve reports from his own experts, including Ms D and his accountant, and a conference of experts was to be convened. The wife's application filed on 1 August 2012 was otherwise dismissed.