Werner & Werner

In the matter of *Werner & Werner*, the husband sought a review of a registrar's decision concerning the provision of expert reports. The registrar had ordered that a remuneration report from a jointly appointed expert be provided to a single joint forensic expert. The husband disputed the reliability of this remuneration report and sought to discharge the jointly appointed expert, proposing instead to rely on his own lay opinion.

The primary legal issue before Rees J was whether to permit the husband to discharge the jointly appointed remuneration expert and substitute his own lay opinion, in circumstances where no formal application had been made to rely on an adversarial expert. The court was required to consider the appropriate procedure for challenging expert evidence and the principles governing the use of single joint experts in family law proceedings.

Rees J dismissed the husband's application, finding that the husband had not made a proper application to rely on an adversarial expert. The court reasoned that the existing framework for expert evidence, particularly the use of single joint experts, was designed to promote efficiency and reduce costs. Allowing a party to unilaterally discharge a jointly appointed expert and substitute their own lay opinion without following the prescribed procedural steps would undermine these objectives. Consequently, the husband's application was dismissed.