Car-Wizard Limited v Vixen Surface Treatments Limited [2026] EWHC 685 (Ch) Car-Wizard Limited v Vixen Surface Treatments Limited [2026] EWHC 685 (Ch)

Car-Wizard Limited v Vixen Surface Treatments Limited [2026] EWHC 685 (Ch)

The claimant asserted misrepresentation and breach of a collateral contract by the defendant in respect of the supply of a vertical diamond cutting...
Unregulated Experts in Family Court Children Proceedings Unregulated Experts in Family Court Children Proceedings

Unregulated Experts in Family Court Children Proceedings

From March to June 2025, the Family Procedure Rule Committee held a consultation on new Family Procedure Rule 25.5A concerning the instruction of...
Working with Expert Witnesses in Clinical Negligence Claims: Practical Considerations and... Working with Expert Witnesses in Clinical Negligence Claims: Practical Considerations and...

Working with Expert Witnesses in Clinical Negligence Claims: Practical Considerations and...

In the fourth article in the Working with expert witnesses series, Michael Kingman from Setfords Solicitors, discusses his experience of...
A Day in the Life of a Housing Disrepair Expert Witness A Day in the Life of a Housing Disrepair Expert Witness

A Day in the Life of a Housing Disrepair Expert Witness

We speak to David Deacon, a chartered surveyor who has spent his career in residential property. He founded Housing Disrepair Surveys, leading a team...

Check out our Case Updates and Member Magazine

Looking for more news relevant to the Expert Witness community? Why not check out our database of cases relevant to Expert Evidence or the latest and previous editions of our member magazine, Expert Matters.

News

Clicking on one of the topics below will display news items relevant to that topic. You can also use the search bar below to identify news items.

Are Digital Forensics Experts prone to bias?
Simon Berney-Edwards 3762

Are Digital Forensics Experts prone to bias?

bySimon Berney-Edwards

The Guardian recently reported that a new study has found participants found more or less evidence on hard drive depending on what contextual information they had.

 

The study undertaken by the University of Oslo, Norway, gave digital forensics examiners from eight countries including the UK the same computer hard drive to analyse. Some of the examiners were provided with only basic contextual information about the case, while others were told the suspect had confessed to the crime, had a strong motive for committing it or that the police believed she had been framed.

 

The study, which will be published in Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation, found that the examiners who had been led to believe the suspect might be innocent documented the fewest traces of evidence in the files, while those who knew of a potential motive identified the most traces.

 

Read the article on the Guardian Website.

Share

Print
Comments are only visible to subscribers.