This article is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal, tax, or financial advice, nor a valuation in an individual case. Despite careful research, we assume no liability for accuracy, completeness, and timeliness. For specific questions, please consult a lawyer or tax advisor. Older content may be outdated due to changes in legislation or case law.
As a general rule, the court will follow the findings of a neutral valuer it has appointed itself, since that valuer possesses the necessary expertise which the court itself lacks.
However, if there are identifiable methodological errors, contradictions, or significant doubts about impartiality, the court may reject an appraisal report and obtain a further report, known as a superior expert opinion (Obergutachten).
A private appraisal report commissioned by one party, on the other hand, inherently carries less evidentiary weight and usually serves only as a basis for objections to the court-ordered appraisal report.
The binding effect arises from the principle of free evaluation of evidence: while the court may generally rely on the valuer's expertise, it must independently assess the plausibility of the valuer's findings.
In practice, a superior expert opinion (Obergutachten) is ordered relatively rarely, since courts already place particular emphasis on qualification and experience when selecting their valuers.