221 Part 5: Primary Courts 5 adjudication: the first opportunity for a full de novo hearing, for cross- examination, and for a court to make fi ndings of fact that are binding in the cases before it. 244   In addition, some matters may not be raised during the preliminary processes at all, and are heard for the first time in the Environment Court. Indeed in workshops we heard anecdotal evidence of parties reserving significant items of evidence for the Environment Court hearing, in order to obtain a tactical advantage. 245   The processes below the Environment Court create a very desirable and effective sifting mechanism with a high disposal rate. But our concern is for those cases that are not resolved by these preliminary processes, and proceed to a hearing in the Environment Court. Those cases are entitled to due process, including a right of appeal on fact and law. Curtailing proper rights in the interests of effi ciency does not deliver justice. Specialist content 246   It is also argued that the High Court is not properly qualified to hear appeals on a point of fact, as these often involve evaluative questions, environmental value judgments, and questions of planning and resource management policy. Some say such matters are best determined by an expert court or tribunal, and the role of the High Court should be restricted to matters of law, such as ensuring the correct interpretation of statutes, and that all and only relevant matters have been considered. 247   There is no question that the Environment Court has valuable expertise and knowledge, and day to day experience of the reality of environment law and policy. However the same argument could be made in respect of matters heard in the Family Court, where there is a general appeal right on fact and law to the High Court. The answer is not to limit appeals on fact in either jurisdiction. 248   The desire to avoid the High Court embarking on an investigation of the appropriateness of policies endorsed or laid down by the Environment Court is understandable. However, the principle of deference by the High Court to the expertise of specialist courts is well established, and where value judgments and policy issues are concerned, the High Court can be expected to continue to defer to the specialist knowledge of the Environment Court. But as well as issues of policy, matters going before the Environment Court often involve complex issues of fact, supported by detailed evidence, and specialist judges, while invaluable, are not infallible. There should always be one opportunity for parties to challenge an error of fact. 249   Our recommendation about extending appeals from the Environment Court to matters of fact as well as law proceeds on the assumption that the appeal would be heard by a bench that includes a judge with knowledge of environment law. Even if appeals from the Environment Court were to remain limited to matters