header-logo header-logo

Checks & balances in business disputes

21 June 2024 / Rakesh Kapila
Issue: 8076 / Categories: Features , Profession , Expert Witness , Commercial
printer mail-detail
Rakesh Kapila explains why & how expert accountants should check the reliability of evidence in disputes involving businesses
  • Offers advice on ensuring evidence is reliable and, where possible, corroborated.

One of the key aspects of the work undertaken by forensic accountants in relation to disputes involving businesses is the availability of evidence that is reliable. Expert accountants therefore need to ensure that any conclusions reached for the purposes of negotiation and court or other proceedings are supported by information that has been subject to sufficient scrutiny. The reliability of evidence is important irrespective of whether the expert is instructed on behalf of the claimant or the defendant.

This article covers aspects of some of the key ‘corroborative’ information sought by forensic accountants instructed to consider the workings of businesses. Such instructions may arise in various types of disputes, including loss of profits cases, family law cases where one or both parties are integral to a business, contractual disputes and personal injury cases involving the loss of earnings relating to

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Gilson Gray—Jeremy Davy

Partner appointed as head of residential conveyancing for England

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

DR Solicitors—Paul Edels

Specialist firm enhances corporate healthcare practice with partner appointment

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll