Our latest insights

In the fast-moving ESG (Environmental, Social and Governance) movement, the last few years have seen a proliferation of sustainability reporting frameworks all intended to help organisations make meaningful disclosures in relation to sustainability and other non-financial information.

Schools and education facilities are not immune to fraud and misconduct. It can be in the form of theft, misappropriation of funds, or the granting of contracts to known associates of key people.

Expert evidence – in both written form in the witness box – is a critical element of any legal proceedings. However, it is an Expert’s conduct in the witness box under cross-examination that is often the most commented upon by the Court through the judgments published.

Asset tracing is a process whereby forensic accountants and investigators ‘follow the money’ by locating assets of value to an individual or company that have been misappropriated. Asset tracing is usually undertaken for the purposes of recovery, often as part of formal insolvency processes or in support of ongoing litigation or fraud investigations. It involves a complex analysis to identify assets and the flow of funds, requiring a combined skillset of forensic accounting, investigation and technology. Engaging forensic accountants specialising in asset tracing can make a substantial difference in what misappropriated assets are recovered and exactly how much.

Across the country, we are seeing a growing trend for shareholder oppression proceedings due to mechanism being used to expediate a deal between disputing shareholders. But how do you value a minority interest held by a shareholder when they have instigated such proceedings? We look at a recent judgment which provides further clarification for valuers in these growing scenarios.

In most cases, some level of assumptions have to be made when developing an expert witness or forensic accounting report. But there are some rules around what assumptions the Courts will accept as part of your findings. From instructed assumptions and assumptions made by the expert and testing their reliability, we explore assumptions in the context of your Expert Witness reports.

The use of third party information is a reality of building an expert witness report. Compiling our areas of expertise with that of others can elevate findings and create a well-rounded, comprehensive report. But not all sources of information are created equal – and the Courts have strict requirements for what third party information is acceptable and what isn’t. In this article we look at the growing trend for an expert’s reliance on third party sources and the perception by the Court.

COVID-19 has cast uncertainty around the value of an earn-out where the business’ financial performance is being impacted by current abnormal trading conditions, either adversely or favorably.