Order 39 is amended by inserting after rule 49 the following heading and rules:
“49A Application of Division
“(1) This Division applies if 2 or more parties to an action call, or intend to call, expert witnesses to give opinion evidence about the same, or a similar, question.
“(2) This Division does not apply to expert evidence to be given before a jury.
“49B Court may direct manner that experts give evidence
The court may, on its own initiative or at the request of a party, direct—
(a) that the expert witnesses confer; or
(b) that the expert witnesses produce for the court's use a document identifying—
(i) the matters and issues about which their opinions agree; and
(ii) the matters and issues about which their opinions differ; or
(c) that—
(i) the expert witnesses give evidence at the trial after all or certain factual evidence relevant to a question has been given; and
(ii) each party intending to call 1 or more expert witnesses close the party's case in relation to a question, subject only to presenting the evidence of the expert witnesses later in the trial; or
(d) that, after all or certain factual evidence has been given, a party who called an expert witness file and serve on each other party an affidavit or statement by the expert witness stating—
(i) whether the expert witness adheres to any opinion given earlier; or
(ii) whether, in light of factual evidence given at the trial, the expert witness wishes to modify any opinion given earlier; or
(e) that—
(i) each expert witness be sworn one immediately after another; and
(ii) when giving evidence, an expert witness occupy a position in the courtroom (not necessarily in the witness box) that is appropriate to the giving of evidence; or
(f) that each expert witness give an oral explanation of his or her opinion, or opinions, on a question; or
(g) that each expert witness give his or her opinion about the opinion, or opinions, given by another expert witness; or
(h) that the expert witnesses be cross-examined, or re-examined, in a certain way or sequence, including, for example, by putting to each expert witness, in turn, each question relevant to one subject or issue at a time, until the cross-examination, or re-examination, of all the witnesses is finished.”.