Prior to March 2004, it was the usual process for parties to each retain a valuer, whether it be for a business, the family home or any other asset that required valuing. If there was a difference between valuers they were then required to ‘hot tub’ and come up with a joint statement setting out any areas of agreement and any areas of continued disagreement. That process occupied a lot of court time and was quite expensive for the parties. In March 2004 there were a plethora of new rules introduced, most notably dealing with the appointment of single experts and also the requirement to disclose any other valuation evidence such as market appraisals, thus preventing parties from ‘shopping around’. Those rules have continued to evolve over time to the current rules, being the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Family Law) Rules 2021 (Cth). We now have a process where one party (usually the applicant) will submit the names of three proposed experts, the other party will choose, and then a joint letter of appointment is prepared. The parties should have minimal interaction with that expert, other than to provide the requested information or access. 

In Knepp & Ruff (No 2) [2026] FedCFamC1F 114, a Division 1 First Instance matter, Her Honour, Christie J, dealt with the unilateral contact by one of the parties with a proposed single expert. The assets in question were business in China and the evidence was that approaches had been made to several potential valuers, in China, by or on behalf of the husband. Her Honour identified that the issue was one of distrust by the wife1 and opined that it was ‘…unwise for the court to sanction the selection of a single expert with whom a party has (even inadvertently) made unilateral contact.2’ 

 The matter came before the court on an Application in a Proceeding filed by the wife, on 24 December 2025 where the matter was listed for final hearing five months thereafter. The wife sought Orders for the appointment of a single expert or experts to value three assets in China. Her Honour made Orders requiring such valuations to proceed in the usual course, in accordance with the Rules. 

Key takeaway: The single expert rules exist as a streamlined process for a number of reasons, including but not limited to, reducing costs and court time as well as increasing the prospects of settlement without a hearing. So that a potential single expert can remain independent there ought to be no communication other than in writing, such that it can be shared with the other party to the proceedings.