22 May 2026 Sean Mosby 1220 Case Updates Car-Wizard Limited v Vixen Surface Treatments Limited [2026] EWHC 685 (Ch) by Sean Mosby Summary The claimant asserted misrepresentation and breach of a collateral contract by the defendant in respect of the supply of a vertical diamond cutting lathe for the claimant’s car wheel repair business. The judge found that the accountancy reports were not expert evidence but simply aids to understanding the details in a complex case. Learning points Simply applying arithmetic rules to data supplied to you, is not expert opinion. Experts must clearly distinguish between any factual evidence they are giving and their opinion as an expert. To continue reading you must be an EWI member, become a member and access exclusive content. Already a member? Login More links Link to the Judgment Share Print Tags 07. Receiving Instructions16. Criticism and ComplaintsAccountancy11. Report Writing15. Giving Oral Evidence Related articles Expert Report or MG11 form? Handling future work arising from an existing instruction through a third-party you no longer have a contractual relationship with Lorimer-Wing v Hashmi [2026] EWHC 1843 (Ch) Dermot Speight & Ors (as trustees of the Thornaby Angling Association) v Robert James Pickersgill [2026] EWCC 48 EWI Guidance on Acting for Litigants in Person Switch article Unregulated Experts in Family Court Children Proceedings Previous Article Praise for experts gives insight into what makes oral evidence credible Next Article Comments are only visible to subscribers.