A FEW weeks ago, I came very close to "hot tubbing" in a snow-bound city centre. But before this thought puts you off your morning coffee, let me explain. "Hot tubbing" is the latest buzz word in the world of dispute resolution and expert-witness work.
Traditionally, the role of the expert witness is to assist the court, arbitrator or the tribunal involved, in understanding the technical issues which form part of a dispute.
Readers as old as me will remember lunchtimes watching Crown Court on television, and many legal dramas feature the expert standing in the witness box being cross-examined by an on-the-ball QC.
The role of the expert witness is a difficult concept to grasp. Although the instructing solicitor's client is paying the bill, the role of the expert witness is not to promote the client's case, but to assist the tribunal in getting to the truth.
Chartered surveyors who act as expert witnesses must comply with rules that strictly govern what you can and cannot do.
The traditional process for expert witnesses is that they give their evidence one at a time, with the expert witness for the claimant going first, during their side's opening of the case, and the expert for the respondent going second.
Each would be asked question by their side's barrister, followed by what can sometimes be fairly short bowling from the other side's counsel.
However, the new concept of "hot tubbing" has reached our shores from Australia. This involves both sides' experts taking the plunge and giving evidence concurrently. They enter the witness box together and are asked questions at the same time by the judge, and sometimes of each other.
This can have advantages – in the traditional format where it is a complicated case, the experts could be giving evidence days or even weeks apart. It is difficult for there to be any continuity of testing the evidence.
In the "hot tub", the two experts' views can be heard at the same time. Indeed, they can hear each other's evidence and respond to it.
There has been a danger of expert witnesses becoming more scarce, particularly after their immunity from negligence claims, dating back 400 years, was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2011.
Many professionals are unused to the highly adversarial arena of the courtroom. Anyone who describes being cross-questioned in the witness box as a comfortable experience is being economical with the truth.
I have read that more professionals will be happy to take on expert witness work if they can "hot tub" with a professional colleague in a less hostile environment and take part in a more professional, academic discussion.
We would be testing our evidence against that of a professional colleague, rather than having it being torn to shreds by counsel.
So will "hot tubbing" make a splash in the UK? We shall see. It is being used in arbitration hearings and my instinct is that it is gathering momentum in the legal world.
My close shave with the hot tub was the judge sending myself and the other expert out of the courtroom to narrow the gap, but we managed to do so without experiencing any troubled waters!