HP-2020-000016 - [2025] EWHC 1451 (Ch)

The parties’ respective toy industry experts were Wendy Munt (Cabo) and John Harper (MGA). They produced initial reports and reply reports in 2022, followed by a joint report. After additional disclosure was provided by MGA (as explained below), both experts provided further individual expert reports and a further joint report during the course of 2024, prior to the trial. There were eventually a total of 15 toy industry reports: six reports from Ms Munt, seven from Mr Harper, and two joint reports.

The joint expert reports identified a large measure of agreement regarding the characteristics and structure of the toy industry, the costs and operational requirements of bringing a toy product to the market, and the likely shape of the profit and loss (P&L) account for a toy company. The experts’ main areas of disagreement were their assessment of the substitutability of LOL Surprise with other toys (such as Barbie), and their assessment of the likely success of Worldeez. The experts were cross-examined for a day each.

Wendy Munt, Cabo’s industry expert, has over 30 years’ experience in the toy industry, as a toy buyer for Argos and subsequently working as a consultant to toy suppliers, retailers and licensors. She fairly accepted that she was not able to give evidence as to the financial metrics relevant to the profitability of a toy supplier; rather, her previous work with toy suppliers had primarily focused on product development. Within the scope of her experience, her evidence as to the toy market dynamics and operational requirements was objective and largely uncontroversial. However, on some key issues of disagreement between the experts, while I have no doubt that Ms Munt was genuinely seeking to assist the court, her evidence came across as rather partisan, leading her to adhere to positions that were not very convincing or well-explained.

John Harper, MGA’s industry expert, has nearly 40 years’ experience in the toy industry, with executiveand management positions at Mattel and Hasbro, and subsequent advisory roles at several toy companies. By contrast with Ms Munt, therefore, his experience was on the supplier rather than the buyer side of the industry. He was an impressive and knowledgeable witness, fairly accepting the limitations of his experience (for example the fact that he had no direct experience of surprise collectible toys), but demonstrating a very detailed knowledge of the areas within his expertise. His evidence was mostly balanced and cogently explained, although he strayed into arguing MGA’s case on the market definition issue.