First, the parties can submit written objections and supplementary questions to the court-appointed valuer, which the valuer must answer in a statement.
If significant doubts about the professional accuracy remain, an oral hearing of the valuer before the court can be requested.
In particularly contentious cases, the court can, upon request, commission a further appraisal report from another valuer if the first appraisal report exhibits gross methodological deficiencies.
Supplementary questions can also be submitted in writing during ongoing proceedings, which often saves time and costs compared to an oral hearing.
Gross methodological deficiencies that justify a re-appraisal typically occur when incorrect methods have been applied, obviously unsuitable comparable properties have been used, or clear calculation errors are evident.
Please note: the content of this article is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal, tax, financial or investment advice. It is not a substitute for individual advice from a licensed lawyer, tax adviser or financial adviser. Despite careful research, we accept no liability for the accuracy, completeness or currency of the information provided. For specific legal or tax questions, please consult a qualified professional adviser.