Italianlawyer: You still don't get it. There is nothing that can happen in the courtroom that "means that the e-cat produces excess heat." The jury might conclude that it does and, for the purposes of the legal outcome, Rossi might collect on that basis. But do not confuse that with reality (assuming you care about reality, which is a rash assumption about any Rossi believer.) If you don't understand the distinction between what a jury might decide and what is factually true, you are not an Italian lawyer or anyone else capable of critical thinking.
Yes, @IL is way out of line here.
It is a contract dispute and the Jury could find for Rossi & reckon the test did not actually work, or vice versa. They might decide the letter of the contract applied, however bad the test. They might decide that even though the test worked, Rossi's previous fraudulent behaviour to IH invalidated the contract.
What the Trial will do is give us more insight into the overall plausibility of Rossi + arguments, and IH + arguments. I'm not sure how good a forum it will be for that. On the plus side the witnesses can be cross-examined and held to account for statements. On the negative it will be a performance for a Jury, and technical matters will be sidelined - and if not sidelined there is really no way for them to be properly assessed.
So I think we get at best real new insight into the credibility and character of the principals.