The lawyer masters the law.
The expert proves the facts.

You master the law. Who answers for the technical facts?

When a dispute is decided by technical evidence, the best legal argument is held hostage by the expert report. The court-appointed expert is impartial, but works under heavy caseload, with no duty to explore the points that favour your client. Without qualified technical challenge, the official report tends to pass as absolute truth.

A trusted party-appointed expert reverses that asymmetry: he drafts the questions to the expert that steer the forensic examination towards what your case needs, follows every act of the court-appointed expert, identifies flaws in method and in chain of custody, and produces the dissenting technical opinion that grounds challenges and appeals.

• Generic questions produce generic answers: the evidence is born without an object
• An adverse report left without technical challenge becomes an uncontested fact on the record
• Chain of custody flaws go unnoticed and nullity is never raised
• The opposing party with a party-appointed expert dictates the vocabulary of the case
• At the hearing, no one from your firm sustains the technical counterpoint

It is in the stage before filing that technical assistance pays the most. The preliminary examination reviews every piece of evidence that will support the claim, maps strong and weak points and answers the question that prevents loss: is the claim worth filing? Not rarely, the analysis reveals evidence the client did not know he had, already fit for the evidentiary stage.

And there is the most powerful move: filing the statement of claim already accompanied by an expert report that demonstrates everything the pleading asserts. The court receives the technical piece from day one; by the time the forensic stage arrives, it is already on the record. There is no way to mislead the court-appointed expert: all that remains for him is to verify and confirm that the technical opinion filed tells the truth.

• Analysis of all evidence before it goes on the record
• Map of the strong and weak points of the case
• Technical assessment of viability: is the claim worth filing?
• Discovery of evidence the client did not know he had
• Expert report to instruct the statement of claim

When the party has been granted free legal aid, the court-appointed expert is paid from the court's own schedule or, failing that, from the CNJ schedule (Resolution 232/2016), which runs from R$ 170 to R$ 870 per report and is adjusted annually for inflation. A judge may exceed that ceiling by up to five times, with reasons given. For an examination that takes 20, 30 or more hours of technical work, even the adjusted ceiling comes to a few tens of reais an hour.

As a market benchmark, the fee schedule of IBAPE-SP (2025) sets the basic technical hour of forensic work at R$ 625.00, with increments for experienced professionals and complex cases, and the average fee table of APEPAR (2025) points the same way. The gap between one figure and the other is no detail: it is of the order of twenty times.

The consequence is arithmetic, not anyone's fault: even intending to do meticulous work, the professional appointed under those conditions has no way to devote to the case the dozens of hours a deep examination demands. The recurring result is simplified reports, in which the points that would favour your case are left unexplored.

And the risk falls precisely on the party who did not pay for the examination: if the simplified report concludes against her, even when she is right, the truth of the case becomes what is written in it. A challenge signed by counsel alone rarely turns that around, because in the eyes of the court the lawyer is, by definition, the interested party: his technical submission arrives filtered by the presumption of partiality, while the court-appointed expert speaks with the standing of an impartial officer of the court. The same technical argument counts for little in a lawyer's brief and counts for a great deal signed by a forensic expert.

It is this double asymmetry, of hours and of credibility, that the forensic expert acting as party-appointed expert corrects: retained by the party, with fees that match the work, he devotes to the case the hours the public schedule cannot cover and brings to the proceedings a voice with the same technical standing as the appointed expert's, in the questions, in the site visits and in the opinion that deepens what the report left shallow. In a dispute that matters, the question is not whether that dedication makes a difference; it is which side of the table will have it.

Pricing per case, with a detailed technical proposal. Options: fixed fees, technical hour or contingency fees. The initial viability consultation is free of charge.

Send the case for a viability review