The experts are unaware of the type and quality of the coffees
Posted: Wed Jan 22, 2025 7:21 am
Reading the question is giving the answer. The experts were not called to issue an opinion on the value of the stocks, constant in the balance sheet, taking into account the stock market value. This value, as a rule, represents the average type of merchandise. GOLDSCHMIDT thus defined the price on the stock market (CARVALHO DE MENDONÇA, vol. 6, part 3, no. 1,621, note 2);
“The price on the Stock Exchange is that which, for a thing sms gateway brunei of a certain type and of a determined quality, persists on the Stock Exchange as an average price for a certain period of time.”
Now, the price quoted by the experts referred to a certain type of coffee. Was the price shown in the balance sheet for that same type, or was it the price of a higher coffee? This is a question that only samples could resolve. However, the samples were not found. What can be concluded from this? That the experts could accept the stock exchange price as adequate? Of course not, because the Code of Procedure (art. 255, paragraph III) does not allow for expert assessment when verification is impracticable due to the temporary nature of the fact.
The lack of samples itself made expert assessment impracticable. How could the experts see, examine, verify and conclude, without the samples, which had become useless over time, that the coffee whose price was mentioned in the balance sheet was identical to the stock exchange price? Why not admit that the coffees mentioned in the balance sheet were priced higher than the stock exchange price because they were of better quality?
“The price on the Stock Exchange is that which, for a thing sms gateway brunei of a certain type and of a determined quality, persists on the Stock Exchange as an average price for a certain period of time.”
Now, the price quoted by the experts referred to a certain type of coffee. Was the price shown in the balance sheet for that same type, or was it the price of a higher coffee? This is a question that only samples could resolve. However, the samples were not found. What can be concluded from this? That the experts could accept the stock exchange price as adequate? Of course not, because the Code of Procedure (art. 255, paragraph III) does not allow for expert assessment when verification is impracticable due to the temporary nature of the fact.
The lack of samples itself made expert assessment impracticable. How could the experts see, examine, verify and conclude, without the samples, which had become useless over time, that the coffee whose price was mentioned in the balance sheet was identical to the stock exchange price? Why not admit that the coffees mentioned in the balance sheet were priced higher than the stock exchange price because they were of better quality?