ARTICLES, CASES & EVENTS
Please click on the links below to view the articles, cases and events (subject to the below disclaimer).
2026
In August 2026, Peter Bates presented at the ASA Australia Chapter Equipment Valuation Conference at Novotel Surfers Paradise, Queensland, Australia. Mr Bates joined an expert panel and separately presented:'Attending as an Expert Witness: What will the judge say about you?'
Mr Bates explains what is required of an expert witness, some tricks and traps, and risk mitigation options for expert witness work. His 25 years’ experience as an expert witness valuer and economist, current practice as an arbitrator, and former practise as a lawyer, give different perspectives for your consideration. An explanation of processes and lessons learned from attending as an expert witness in Australia, New Zealand, the USA, the Cook Islands, and in other offshore matters. This presentation will help you find where to go for more information, what to avoid and some simple systems for making expert witness work profitable, lower risk, less stressful… and sometimes lucrative and fun!
Mr Bates explains what is required of an expert witness, some tricks and traps, and risk mitigation options for expert witness work. His 25 years’ experience as an expert witness valuer and economist, current practice as an arbitrator, and former practise as a lawyer, give different perspectives for your consideration. An explanation of processes and lessons learned from attending as an expert witness in Australia, New Zealand, the USA, the Cook Islands, and in other offshore matters. This presentation will help you find where to go for more information, what to avoid and some simple systems for making expert witness work profitable, lower risk, less stressful… and sometimes lucrative and fun!
In June 2026, Peter Bates was appointed as an Assessor Member of the Board of Appeal to the Valuers Registration Board of New Zealand, under the Valuers Act 1948 (NZ).
In March 2026, Peter Bates was appointed by Her Excellency, The Right Honourable Dame Cindy Kiro, the Governor-General of New Zealand, to be a member to exercise the jurisdiction of every Land Valuation Tribunal established under the Land Valuation Proceedings Act 1948 (NZ), for a term of 5 years, pursuant to s19(2) of that Act.
A NZ Court of Appeal judgment has brought a significant change for cross lease properties and the values. The NZ Court of Appeal identified the considerations for withholding consent for cross lease as a question for a reasonable lessor, not other lessee who has been detrimentally effected. This effectively overturned the Smallfield v Brown (1991) decision. Mr Peter Bates is intimately familiar with the case and circumstance and available for cross lease valuation analysis.
The Bates opinion was adopted by the High Court of NZ in relation to the circumtances of properties for an application for modification of covenant under the Property Law Act 2007 (NZ). The modification was not granted but the Bates valuation process would have been preferred it were:
"[103] In the same vein, the question of compensation does not arise. Had it arisen, I would have preferred the expert evidence of Mr Bates. I am easily satisfied that the motivation to purchase their properties was heavily influenced by the guaranteed protection and buffer and that the benefit of the covenant directly adds to the market value of their properties. The intangible aspects of that protection — privacy, aspect, retention of the semi-rural feel and amenity — are not easily compensable in money terms but Mr Bates’ approach is entirely consistent with the Court of Appeal guidance in Reynolds.
[105] It follows that, had any of the threshold grounds been made out, I would have ordered compensation payable in the sums assessed by Mr Bates."
"[103] In the same vein, the question of compensation does not arise. Had it arisen, I would have preferred the expert evidence of Mr Bates. I am easily satisfied that the motivation to purchase their properties was heavily influenced by the guaranteed protection and buffer and that the benefit of the covenant directly adds to the market value of their properties. The intangible aspects of that protection — privacy, aspect, retention of the semi-rural feel and amenity — are not easily compensable in money terms but Mr Bates’ approach is entirely consistent with the Court of Appeal guidance in Reynolds.
[105] It follows that, had any of the threshold grounds been made out, I would have ordered compensation payable in the sums assessed by Mr Bates."
2025
The Bates opinion was adopted by the High Court of NZ as to market value forecasting for high value Remuera properties which were the subject of an international dispute (Hong Kong) and in relation to the Criminal Proceeds (Recovery) Act 2009 (NZ).
"[22] Mr Bates, registered valuer, gave expert evidence on behalf of the first respondent, and he was cross-examined at the hearing...
[64](b) I consider that this application should focus on the future under the two alternatives, namely to maintain the asset restrained in its current form or to order an early sale to convert the asset into cash proceeds. Mr Bates’ evidence about likely increases in value during 2025 of 5−7 per cent is uncontradicted. Taking the base land value as at 18 March 2024 and applying an uplift of five per cent produces an expected increase in land value of at least $415,000 this year. On my assessment, this increase will exceed the OA’s holding costs over the same period, based on the level of those costs to date (such as for insurance, maintenance, and security). Accordingly, my assessment is that the assets that are the subject of this restraining order are not expected to depreciate either in their own right, or using a net approach, by mid-2026 when the outcome of the Hong Kong proceedings might be known."
"[22] Mr Bates, registered valuer, gave expert evidence on behalf of the first respondent, and he was cross-examined at the hearing...
[64](b) I consider that this application should focus on the future under the two alternatives, namely to maintain the asset restrained in its current form or to order an early sale to convert the asset into cash proceeds. Mr Bates’ evidence about likely increases in value during 2025 of 5−7 per cent is uncontradicted. Taking the base land value as at 18 March 2024 and applying an uplift of five per cent produces an expected increase in land value of at least $415,000 this year. On my assessment, this increase will exceed the OA’s holding costs over the same period, based on the level of those costs to date (such as for insurance, maintenance, and security). Accordingly, my assessment is that the assets that are the subject of this restraining order are not expected to depreciate either in their own right, or using a net approach, by mid-2026 when the outcome of the Hong Kong proceedings might be known."
2024
The Bates opinion was adopted by the Family Court despite access for a valuation inspection not having been made available by the party in occupation. After extensive cross examination of market movement, local sales, construction cost and valuation issues, the Bates value was adopted by the Court in NZFC 8913 [4 September 2024] (case not published due to the Family Law privacy context).
In a modification of covenant case under the Property Law Act 2007 NZ the Bates valuation process to estimate a reasonable price for compensation was adopted by the other expert witness valuer. On that basis a common opinion was established between the expert witness valuers, which was adopted by the High Court of NZ as the relevant value.
"[12] There is a minor difference in the figures adopted by the valuers as to the reasonable price for which the proprietor of 16 Scott Road might have sold the property rights in the covenant. Mr Walker says $650,000 (plus GST, if any). Mr Bates says $775,000 (including GST, if any). They have, however, agreed a reasonable price of $660,000 (plus GST, if any) which is the equivalent of $759,000 if expressed on a GST inclusive basis.
[206] While the valuers agree on the figure of $400,000, they disagree on whether that is “significant”. Mr Walker (plaintiffs’ witness) says it is not. Mr Bates (defendants’ witness) says it is significant."
"[12] There is a minor difference in the figures adopted by the valuers as to the reasonable price for which the proprietor of 16 Scott Road might have sold the property rights in the covenant. Mr Walker says $650,000 (plus GST, if any). Mr Bates says $775,000 (including GST, if any). They have, however, agreed a reasonable price of $660,000 (plus GST, if any) which is the equivalent of $759,000 if expressed on a GST inclusive basis.
[206] While the valuers agree on the figure of $400,000, they disagree on whether that is “significant”. Mr Walker (plaintiffs’ witness) says it is not. Mr Bates (defendants’ witness) says it is significant."
2022
An application for an extinguishment of covenant under the Property law Act 2007 (NZ) was declined by the High Court. The Court relied on Bates evidence in relation to the nature and history of development, zonings, and infrastructure projects in the location. Other evidence referred to by the Court were the Bates observation as to particulars required for development analysis and the ongoing benefits of the covenant given the character of the site an immediate surround. See paragraphs [51 - 56] and [71].
The Land Valuation Tribunal in Zyxcba Developments Limited v Auckland Council [2022] NZLVT 15 (ENV-2021-AKL-27), which resulted in an increase in compensation from $628,000 to $1,816,000 plus GST, for Bates Client.
2021
Bates expert evidence adopted to inform the High Court of NZ on a waterside graveyard site with a jetty, including significant historical research and analysis back to early settler days, as well as historic valuation dates in the intervening period. This included leasehold analysis and valuation of a jetty.
Mr Bates’ expert opinion was accepted and adopted by the NZ Court of Appeal, 30 June 2021 in relation to a modification of covenant case: Parwati Chand, Ram Chand and Khan and Associates Tustee Company (No. 110) Limited v Auckland Council [2021] NZCA 282 [30 June 2021].
"[4] The Chands failed to persuade Palmer J that the modification would not substantially injure the third to fifth respondents. The Judge accepted the evidence of the respondents’ valuer, Peter Bates, that the modification would have a significant effect of about $100,000 on the value of each of their properties and for that reason would substantially injure them. The Judge dismissed the application with costs.
[14] Palmer J accepted the evidence of Mr Bates that the Chands’ proposed subdivision would have “a significant effect on the property values” of the respondents.5 For that reason, the proposed modification of the covenant would substantially injure the respondents. He observed that they bought their properties with benefit of the covenant and the Chands bought theirs subject to it. He concluded that the statutory conditions for modifying the covenant were not fulfilled.
[56] As noted at [20]– [22] above, we are not persuaded that the Judge was wrong to find the proposal would cause loss of value of the respondents’ properties, and he was entitled to accept Mr Bates’s estimate of the value of their property right over the Chands’ land."
Also see paragraphs [17], [18], [21], [23], [24]
"[4] The Chands failed to persuade Palmer J that the modification would not substantially injure the third to fifth respondents. The Judge accepted the evidence of the respondents’ valuer, Peter Bates, that the modification would have a significant effect of about $100,000 on the value of each of their properties and for that reason would substantially injure them. The Judge dismissed the application with costs.
[14] Palmer J accepted the evidence of Mr Bates that the Chands’ proposed subdivision would have “a significant effect on the property values” of the respondents.5 For that reason, the proposed modification of the covenant would substantially injure the respondents. He observed that they bought their properties with benefit of the covenant and the Chands bought theirs subject to it. He concluded that the statutory conditions for modifying the covenant were not fulfilled.
[56] As noted at [20]– [22] above, we are not persuaded that the Judge was wrong to find the proposal would cause loss of value of the respondents’ properties, and he was entitled to accept Mr Bates’s estimate of the value of their property right over the Chands’ land."
Also see paragraphs [17], [18], [21], [23], [24]
2020
Modification of covenant case, Auckland High Court, 17 September 2020: Court finds covenant should not be modified: "[15] I accept the evidence of Mr Bates that there would be a significant effect on the property values of the respondents. I can see no reason to question his methodology, reasoning or conclusions. For that reason, I accept the proposed modification will substantially injure the respondents. They bought their properties with the benefit of the restrictive covenant. The Chands bought their property with the burden of the restrictive covenant. The statutory conditions for modifying the covenant are not fulfilled." CHAND v AUCKLAND COUNCIL [2020] NZHC 2422 [17 September 2020]
Bates Letter: New Developments - Epidemic Lockdown & ADLS Lease Clause 27.5 - 24 April 2020
MBIE Announce Forensic Valuation is an Essential Service 20 April 2020
Bates Valuation Evidence Appeal for Essential Status 30 March 2020
COVID-19 New Zealand Valuation Member Alert
Notice from the Valuers Registration Board of Queensland, Australia 9 April 2020
ADLS gives background of lease clause 27.5 - 7 April 2020
Media Announcement from Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann 8 April 2020 - regarding the operation of the courts under COVID-19 alert levels.
Media Announcement from Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann 23 March 2020 - regarding arrangements for New Zealand Courts following the rise in COVID-19 to alert level 4.
Media Statement from Chief Justice Helen Winkelmann 22 March 2020 - regarding justice services throughout the New Zealand lockdown COVID-19.
2019
Guest lecture by Peter Bates, Massey University, School of Accounting, Albany and video linked to Palmerston North: Land Law Reform - Unit Titles Act Review and Land Transfer Bill and Act 2017.
Expert evidence, Manukau District Court: Peter Bates’ opinion and guidance was adopted as the basis for orders by consent of both parties to resolve a view, fence and tree dispute under the Property Law Act 2007. This culminated in a prompt resolution of the dispute on site with the parties, counsel and the Court attending at the property with orders following that day.
"[287] I accept Mr Bates’ evidence.
[337] That is plainly completely unrealistic when compared with the expert evidence from Mr Bates. His evidence was that the total market rent for the 35 years and five months from 1 February 1982 to 7 July 2017 would be $650,544.98.
[354] The evidence that the Court is left with is the evidence of Mr Bates. There is no evidence to contradict his opinion evidence. I accept that Mr Kaye has provided a proper basis for calculating mesne profits. Based on Mr Bates’ figures, I calculate the amount as $185,840.71 for the period of six years prior to 22 December 2017."
Also see paragraphs [282], [284], [285], [331], [332], [342] and [339].
"[287] I accept Mr Bates’ evidence.
[337] That is plainly completely unrealistic when compared with the expert evidence from Mr Bates. His evidence was that the total market rent for the 35 years and five months from 1 February 1982 to 7 July 2017 would be $650,544.98.
[354] The evidence that the Court is left with is the evidence of Mr Bates. There is no evidence to contradict his opinion evidence. I accept that Mr Kaye has provided a proper basis for calculating mesne profits. Based on Mr Bates’ figures, I calculate the amount as $185,840.71 for the period of six years prior to 22 December 2017."
Also see paragraphs [282], [284], [285], [331], [332], [342] and [339].
Presentation given by Peter Bates to Beca, regarding Compliance in Property Advisory and Valuation, New Zealand, Australia, Asia-Pacific:
Presentation given by Peter Bates to Graduate Valuers regarding preparing for VRB registration:
2018
Peter Bates’ expert opinion was accepted and adopted by the High Court at Auckland in relation to retrospective historic valuation opinion, on both market values and rental values since the early 1980s, up to the date of hearing. This case dealt with the issues of how much rent was owed for occupancy of a property since the 1980s, and what value, if any, had been added to the property by the occupant in that period. Peter’s evidence is discussed in paragraphs [282]-[287]. Gordon J further accepted Peter’s description of the property and locale (at [331]). The Plaintiff’s position is also disproved by Peter’s expert evidence according to the judge, at [337].
2017
Expert Witness, Peter Bates: The Family Court at Auckland adopted the Bates valuation opinion for a house as a chattel together with a licence to occupy Maori land. This case grappled with the potential interface of family law and Maori land law. We generally do not provide links to Family Court decisions but, for lawyers, reference may be made to: FAM – 2015 – 004 – 001028; [2017] NZFC 6779.
Invited Speaker: The Auckland Branch of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers has invited Peter Bates to speak about the latest NZIV law reform projects at the upcoming NZIV Auckland Branch AGM on 20 March 2017. This will include discussion of the successful submissions on the Land Transfer Bill and the recent submissions on the Unit Titles Act 2010 review.
Presentation by Peter Bates to the New Zealand Institute of Valuers Council Meeting on 1 March at Auckland Domestic Airport. The paper was entitled, ‘The lack of oversight and fair process – how to up our game: Disciplinary Processes under the Valuers Act 1948 with two case studies'
Appointment: Peter Bates appointed by the President of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers, in February 2017, to make submissions on behalf of the Institute regarding the Review and Reform of the Unit Titles Act 2010.
2016
Guest presenter Peter Bates: LTB Fraud and Indefeasibility, October 2016 Massey University School of Finance and Economics
Government Administration Select Committee Submissions: Peter Bates and the NZIV President submitted further commentary on behalf of the NZIV on the Compensation Calculation (Valuation) Provisions of the Land Transfer Bill in July 2016.
Appointment: Peter Bates appointed by the New Zealand Institute of Valuers Council, in May 2016, to make submissions on behalf of the Institute regarding the Land Transfer Bill (including preparing the written submissions and appearing before Select Committee).
Appointment: Peter Bates appointed by the Law and Economics Association of New Zealand (LEANZ), to join its National Executive Committee, April 2016. LEANZ is a charitable organisation which promotes education and evidence based policy with regard to the field of law and economics. See the LEANZ website for their upcoming complimentary Wellington and Auckland Seminars - Come along and join us for these excellent events.
Appointment: Peter Bates appointed by the President of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers, in April 2016, to be the Institutes' liaison to the New Zealand Law Society and Auckland District Law Society in respect of the Land Transfer Bill and to write the NZIV submissions. The Auckland District Law Society Incorporated's submissions cited the New Zealand Institute of Valuers submissions with approval.
Seminar Presenters: Peter Bates and Blair Dyer: New Zealand Law Society Presentation: "Risk - Property Values and PI Insurance" 16 February 2016.
2015
Expert Witness, Peter Bates: The High Court at Auckland preferred the Bates opinion on valuation methodology and application in relation to the retrospective valuation of a high value beach front property at two historic dates and preferred the Bates sales comparisons. The Court adopted the Bates market value: Messenger & Anor v Stanaway Real Estate Limited [2015] NZHC 1795 [31 July 2015]. See [105] to [111].
Expert Witness, Peter Bates: The North Shore District Court followed the Bates opinion in relation to a S333 - 338 Property Law Act 2007 dispute regarding a fence and trees obstructing a coastal view shaft. The other expert was taken to have "accepted" at [41] and to "concede" at [42] to the prevailing Bates valuation opinion that: "...the existence of the views adds value to properties and that the obstruction of such views will inevitably result in a reduction in value" [41] "... some hardship is caused... with no corresponding hardship suffered..."[42] . The Bates advice also contributed to a "fair and reasonable" [57] compromise and modification to the order sought (southern panels need not be subject to an order [57]). The Judge also adopted other Bates advice regarding the nature and layout of the properties for issues considered in the judgment, at [50] and [33]. See: Quinlan v Bishop [2015] NZDC 20667.
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Massey University School of Accountancy: The Fraud Exception to Indefeasibility of Title and the Law Commission’s Suggestions for Future Legislation, July 2015 (click link to view slides or slides with the handouts can be obtained by students only through Dr Nicholas Smith or the Massey website).
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Auckland University of Technology Law School: Valuer Terms of Engagement and Professional Liability in Civil Remedies, 2015 (slides can be obtained by students only through Mike French or AUT Online. However, the model 'Terms of Engagement' and report extracts presented are withheld).
Massey University: Massey Magazine, Issue 32 April 2015 profiles Peter Bates.
Auckland University of Technology Law School: AUTLaw News Autumn 2015, p6, profiles Peter Bates
Article by Peter Bates: New Zealand Engineering News: PD Bates, Baker Law, Leases, alterations, occupancy - where is your business heading NZEN p22, Feb 2015 VOL 46 No 1.
Article by Peter Bates: New Zealand Engineering News: PD Bates, Baker Law, Make sure your insurance works for you NZEN p53, Mar 2015 VOL 46 No. 2.
Expert Witness, Peter Bates: The North Shore District Court followed the Bates opinion in relation to a S333 - 338 Property Law Act 2007 dispute regarding a fence and trees obstructing a coastal view shaft. The other expert was taken to have "accepted" at [41] and to "concede" at [42] to the prevailing Bates valuation opinion that: "...the existence of the views adds value to properties and that the obstruction of such views will inevitably result in a reduction in value" [41] "... some hardship is caused... with no corresponding hardship suffered..."[42] . The Bates advice also contributed to a "fair and reasonable" [57] compromise and modification to the order sought (southern panels need not be subject to an order [57]). The Judge also adopted other Bates advice regarding the nature and layout of the properties for issues considered in the judgment, at [50] and [33]. See: Quinlan v Bishop [2015] NZDC 20667.
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Massey University School of Accountancy: The Fraud Exception to Indefeasibility of Title and the Law Commission’s Suggestions for Future Legislation, July 2015 (click link to view slides or slides with the handouts can be obtained by students only through Dr Nicholas Smith or the Massey website).
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Auckland University of Technology Law School: Valuer Terms of Engagement and Professional Liability in Civil Remedies, 2015 (slides can be obtained by students only through Mike French or AUT Online. However, the model 'Terms of Engagement' and report extracts presented are withheld).
Massey University: Massey Magazine, Issue 32 April 2015 profiles Peter Bates.
Auckland University of Technology Law School: AUTLaw News Autumn 2015, p6, profiles Peter Bates
Article by Peter Bates: New Zealand Engineering News: PD Bates, Baker Law, Leases, alterations, occupancy - where is your business heading NZEN p22, Feb 2015 VOL 46 No 1.
Article by Peter Bates: New Zealand Engineering News: PD Bates, Baker Law, Make sure your insurance works for you NZEN p53, Mar 2015 VOL 46 No. 2.
2014
Expert Witness, Peter Bates: High Court at Auckland adopts Bates opinion that a property with geotechnical, title, building and compliance problems had a nil value. The Bates indicated value range was $150,000 through a negative value, if legal, planning and engineering advice could confirm certain requirements and costs. In the absence of such external specialist advice, a nil value was recommended by Bates and adopted by the High Court: Jerard v Paxton and Paxton [2014] NZHC 2493 [10 October 2014], CIV 2011-404-7422. See [31], [32] and [45].
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Auckland University of Technology Law School: Valuer Liability in Civil Remedies, 2014 (associated handouts can only be accessed by students through Mike French or AUT Online).
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Massey University School of Economics and Finance: Valuation Cases and Valuation of Leaky Buildings, 2014 (slides can be obtained by students only through Alan Pope or the Massey website)
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Auckland University of Technology Law School: Valuer Liability in Civil Remedies, 2014 (associated handouts can only be accessed by students through Mike French or AUT Online).
Guest Lecture by Peter Bates: Massey University School of Economics and Finance: Valuation Cases and Valuation of Leaky Buildings, 2014 (slides can be obtained by students only through Alan Pope or the Massey website)
2013
BATES MASSEY UNIVERSITY INSURANCE VALUATION SEMINAR 2013:
Bates Massey University Insurance Seminar 2013 Program Information
Seminar Introduction - Defining professional boundaries in insurance valuation
Presentation by Peter Bates
Professional and Massey Qualifications - An overview for Quantity Surveyors and Valuers Presentation by Alan Pope
QS Process for Reinstatement Cost Estimate
Presentation by James White
Valuers' Approach - Modal Rates and Issues
Presentation by Brett Smithies
Legal Issues- what property rights are being valued
Presentation by Rod Thomas
Seminar Introduction - Defining professional boundaries in insurance valuation
Presentation by Peter Bates
Professional and Massey Qualifications - An overview for Quantity Surveyors and Valuers Presentation by Alan Pope
QS Process for Reinstatement Cost Estimate
Presentation by James White
Valuers' Approach - Modal Rates and Issues
Presentation by Brett Smithies
Legal Issues- what property rights are being valued
Presentation by Rod Thomas
2012
Property Council of New Zealand Prize for academic achievement in property law (for 2012) awarded to Peter Bates
2011
NZIV (Auckland) AGM pass Bates motions (all votes in favour, none against).
Expert Witness Peter Bates: Weathertight Homes Tribunal set damages between full remediation / replacement cost and diminution of value. Market values assessed by Bates were considered by the Tribunal to be in accordance with the conventional approach. The market values and other market information provided by Bates were used to calculate damages, but including an adjustment for the particular (non-market) value the owners attached to their unique property and the circumstances of their loss : Strickland v Jargen and Others [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 46, TRI-2010-100-000099. See [114] to [125].
Expert Witness Peter Bates: Appointed by the President of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers (then Mrs Nicola Bilbrough) to advise on around twenty subdivision property value assessments in Auckland for forensic tax purposes.
Expert Witness Peter Bates: Weathertight Homes Tribunal set damages between full remediation / replacement cost and diminution of value. Market values assessed by Bates were considered by the Tribunal to be in accordance with the conventional approach. The market values and other market information provided by Bates were used to calculate damages, but including an adjustment for the particular (non-market) value the owners attached to their unique property and the circumstances of their loss : Strickland v Jargen and Others [2011] NZWHT AUCKLAND 46, TRI-2010-100-000099. See [114] to [125].
Expert Witness Peter Bates: Appointed by the President of the New Zealand Institute of Valuers (then Mrs Nicola Bilbrough) to advise on around twenty subdivision property value assessments in Auckland for forensic tax purposes.
2010
Article: Australian New Zealand Property Journal publish Prof. Dr Cox article based on the Bates Valuation Reporting, Law and Ethics Seminar 2010 with the questions written by Peter Bates: Prof Dr Cox, Ethics and the valuer's fiduciary duty to adequately inform the client; ANZPJ Dec 2010 Vol 2 No 8.
BATES VALUATION REPORTING LAW AND ETHICS SEMINAR 2010:
Bates Valuation Reporting, Law & Ethics Seminar 2010 Title Screen
Bates Valuation Reporting, Law & Ethics Seminar 2010 Program Information
Valuers in Dispute Resolution and as Expert Witnesses
Presentation by Bob Hawkes
*Note: High Court Rules have since changed
Practical Ways to Avoid Risk and Breaching Practice Standards
Presentation by Iain Gribble
Valuation Technique to Improve Rigour and Transparency in Commercial Valuation
Presentation by Mark McNamara
Valuation Practice Standards 2010
Presentation by Evan Gamby
Ethics and the Valuer's Fiduciary Duty to Adequately Inform the Client
Presentation by Dr Noel Cox, Professor of Law
Bates Valuation Reporting, Law & Ethics Seminar 2010 Program Information
Valuers in Dispute Resolution and as Expert Witnesses
Presentation by Bob Hawkes
*Note: High Court Rules have since changed
Practical Ways to Avoid Risk and Breaching Practice Standards
Presentation by Iain Gribble
Valuation Technique to Improve Rigour and Transparency in Commercial Valuation
Presentation by Mark McNamara
Valuation Practice Standards 2010
Presentation by Evan Gamby
Ethics and the Valuer's Fiduciary Duty to Adequately Inform the Client
Presentation by Dr Noel Cox, Professor of Law
DISCLAIMER
These papers are for educational purposes and to provide public discussion of professional issues among professionals. The topics, speakers, questions and experiences discussed do not necessarily represent the opinions or experiences of Bates Resolution Ltd, its employees or the independent speakers and article authors. No liability is accepted, whatsoever, by Bates Resolution Ltd, Peter Bates or any of the independent speakers, writers or organisations for the advice or any reliance on the opinions or representations made at, or in association with, the Bates & Associates, Bates Valuation Evidence Limited or Bates Resolution Ltd Seminars or other articles.
