Ask any commercial litigator what’s changed in recent years, and the answer comes with a sigh: the cases have gotten harder. Key facts now live inside complex technology—software, data, algorithms, and networks—that are hard for non-experts to interpret. From generative AI to decentralized finance, the disputes heading for litigation in 2026 demand expert witnesses who can serve as a bridge among the worlds of technology, economics, and law.
The following areas are already showing elevated demand for expert testimony, and in many matters, the right expert will prove pivotal to prevailing at trial or in settlement.
Intellectual property and innovation
Generative AI is rapidly redrawing the boundaries of authorship, inventorship, and ownership. What happens when a model “creates” something “novel”? Who is the true author of that work—and how should it be valued? These once-hypothetical questions sit at the heart of modern IP disputes.
Norton Rose Fulbright’s 2025 Annual Litigation Trends Survey shows that one in four companies saw their exposure to IP disputes rise over the past year, with nearly half of that group (46%) citing patents as their greatest vulnerability. For the second year in a row, AI use ranked as the leading driver of future disputes, cited by 55% of respondents.
Litigators need experts who can decode how AI systems “think” and where human input ends. Computer scientists, software engineers, and AI ethicists are already being tapped to clarify questions of novelty and obviousness. On the financial side, valuation and damages professionals play a larger role as courts grapple with how to quantify the worth of algorithmic invention or AI-generated content.
In short, as technology reshapes the contours of ownership, expert clarity is central to determining what, and who, counts as “original.”
Antitrust and competition
The new frontier in antitrust goes beyond price-fixing schemes or monopolistic behavior. It’s about how algorithms quietly shape markets—when automated systems decide what prices to display, which products rise to the top of a search result, or how a platform promotes its own services over competitors’.
Regulators are paying close attention. In March 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest in a case related to algorithmic pricing, warning that “competitors’ use of algorithmic technologies to coordinate their decision-making poses a growing threat to free-market competition.”
For litigators, this evolution is transforming how evidence must be built. Antitrust cases hinge on economists versed in digital marketplaces—how data, algorithms, and network effects shape competition. Judges increasingly request quantifiable models rather than abstract theory. In Klein v. Meta Platforms, Inc., for example, the court excluded the plaintiffs’ economics expert for an ‘analytical gap’ between data and opinion—now the norm.
Courts challenge economic expert testimony more than any other field; over one-third of opinions are excluded under Daubert for unreliable methodology. The result is a higher evidentiary bar—and a growing premium on experts who can make the math make sense.
Fintech, digital assets, and compliance
As digital finance matures, the lines between innovation and risk are blurring. Cryptocurrency, decentralized finance, and tokenized assets are generating litigation around valuation, fraud, and regulatory compliance.
Wolters Kluwer and arXiv research highlight DeFi, stablecoins, and high-risk AI as 2026 flashpoints, with regulators applying targeted oversight rather than generic financial rules.
Courts rely on blockchain architects, forensic accountants, and compliance officers to trace token flows, explain anti–money-laundering rules, and interpret evolving frameworks. As more “post-hoc” reviews of failed fintech ventures reach the courts, these voices untangle how models misfired and what compliance obligations were breached.
Commercial contracts
Even the most traditional areas of litigation are becoming more technical. Contract disputes once turned on delivery schedules or pricing clauses; today, they hinge on whether a software system performed as promised or an AI tool acted within its intended ethical framework.
The 2026 legal-tech forecasts report anticipates a surge in disputes involving smart contracts, failed IT implementations, and AI procurement agreements.
For attorneys, that means calling on IT project managers, software engineers, and AI governance specialists who can explain not only what went wrong, but why—and whether contractual obligations were technically possible in the first place. As business operations become inseparable from digital systems, contract litigation demands technical storytelling.
Data privacy, cybersecurity, and cross-border commerce
Data is both an asset and a liability—and the patchwork of global privacy laws ensures that breaches reverberate far beyond a single jurisdiction. The Lexology data-law analysis calls data regulation a “global fault line,” with mass privacy claims and cross-border transfer disputes rising across regions.
Litigators are already relying more heavily on cybersecurity forensics and privacy compliance experts to explain what occurred in a breach, who bears responsibility, and what the true economic harm is. Damages hinge on “data value lost”—a metric still in flux and highly dependent on expert analysis.
As privacy enforcement grows more assertive worldwide, these experts are central to ascribing monetary terms for digital harm.
The race for top experts is on—early expert witness engagement will be critical in 2026
From IP to privacy, commercial litigation demands technical, interdisciplinary experts who can translate complexity into clarity.
At AP Expert Group, we’re seeing law firms engage expert witnesses earlier than ever —not just to testify, but to help shape case strategy and model potential arguments well before trial. Not only is the pool of qualified experts hard-pressed to keep up with the rising number of cases, expectations have evolved: attorneys prize industry experience and applied knowledge as much as academic prestige.
Even more nascent categories are on the horizon: experts in AI bias and ethics, supply chain resilience, and international trade disputes involving export controls and cross-border technology restrictions—fields where regulation is still catching up to reality. Those who can blend technical depth with clear, courtroom-ready communication are already being actively sought.
For litigators, the takeaway is direct and urgent: the expert witness landscape is shifting as fast as the technologies under scrutiny. Early expert engagement sharpens strategy, strengthens discovery, and boosts leverage—whether a case goes to trial or not. And if it does, expert testimony becomes pivotal in explaining technical evidence and defending damages calculations in front of a judge or jury.
Lock in an expert witness
Connect with AP Expert Group to discuss locking in expert witnesses to give you an edge in your commercial litigation cases.