Arguing that one valuation is too low/high is and admission that the valuation is wrong and you are therefore open to accusations of fraud. So maybe “no legal

Arguing that one valuation is too low/high is and admission that the valuation is wrong and you are therefore open to accusations of fraud. So maybe “no legal argument” is an oversimplification, but no reasonable legal argument can be made without an admission that the other party needs to update their valuation in their benefit.