How do experts come to such different conclusions?
I was a panelist with Suzanne Loomer (KPMG Toronto) and Bob Belliveau (McInnes Cooper Halifax) where we spoke of the key elements that underpin an expert’s opinion on business valuation or damages:
- facts of the case
- assumptions made by the expert
- the expert’s application of an appropriate methodology
- the expert’s own professional judgment.
We discussed how this occurs and how to bridge the ‘value gap’ in mediation and arbitration. Options included standard cross-examination, expert ‘hot-tubbing’, and joint reports.
If you would like a copy of the PowerPoint that accompanied the presentation, please let me know.
