JMW Resists Husband’s Evidence in Financial Proceedings
JMW’s divorce solicitors acted for a wife in complex financial remedy proceedings and opposed an application by the husband to rely on his own expert evidence, rather than that of a jointly-appointed expert, to calculate the value of his business interests.
The Case
JMW was instructed by a wife who was facing complex and technical financial remedy proceedings during her divorce to seek a fair financial settlement on her behalf. As part of the proceedings, a jointly instructed forensic accountant was appointed to value the parties’ respective business interests. The husband had interests in 19 businesses, while the wife had an interest in four, with the overall assets valued between £78m and £105m.
The husband was not happy with the valuation that the expert had provided of £27m for his business interests, and made a “Daniels v Walker” application to rely on his own expert evidence that valued his interests at a significantly lower £18m. A Daniels v Walker application is a request to put separate expert evidence before the court where a single joint expert has already been instructed.
Our client did not agree that another expert should be appointed and did not accept the valuation of the husband’s expert, given that it was some £9m lower than the valuation provided by the jointly appointed expert. Daniels v Walker applications are not straightforward, and our client needed a team that could robustly oppose the application. The total assets of the parties totalled over £100m, so she also needed family lawyers who were used to dealing with high-value, complex matters, and who could understand the complex business structures and shareholdings.
How Did JMW Help?
The client chose JMW for our experience and track record of success in this area. JMW resisted the Daniels v Walker application on our client’s behalf and made considered submissions to the court as to why the husband should not be granted permission to rely on the report he had obtained. This involved considering the methodology used by the husband’s expert, analysis of the markets the business operated in, and the timing of the husband’s application. JMW’s experience in this area and thorough knowledge of these technical considerations put us in a strong position to make this argument.
We scrutinised the Daniels v Walker application made by the husband and made convincing arguments in response to demonstrate to the court that the valuation report that had already been obtained was sufficient to assist the court in reaching an outcome.
The Outcome
Thanks to JMW’s efforts, the husband’s application to rely on his own expert evidence was refused. The court was persuaded to take a more proportionate approach, in line with our recommendation, and it was directed that additional information that had been sent to the husband’s expert should also be provided to the jointly appointed expert, who could then consider whether it changed her view on the valuation of the business.
This was a great result for our client as it meant that the husband could not automatically rely on the lower valuation of his business interests. Our team helped our client to navigate the complex legal challenges of a Daniels v Walker application and managed the court proceedings with precision and expertise. This helped to safeguard our client’s position and ensure that assets that were central to the client’s case were not undervalued.
A fair financial settlement during a divorce relies on a full and thorough understanding of each party’s financial position. If you are concerned about expert evidence or the complexities of a Daniels v Walker application, contact JMW today. Call us on 0345 872 6666 or use our online enquiry form to request a call back at your convenience.
