Is it appropriate and even a practice to permit the opposing party to call reply evidence in a personal injury case?

18. It has been suggested that it is appropriate and even a “practice” to permit the party that wishes to call the evidence objected to subject to the right of the other party to call reply evidence in that respect (see, for example, Machado v. Berlet et al. (1986) 57 D.L.R. (2d) 207). I agree that is appropriate if it is judged sufficient to ameliorate the unfairness inherent in not bringing the impeaching or contradicting evidence to the attention of the witness and the party calling that witness. This is notwithstanding that reply evidence window appropriately a small one, and that permitting or a party to call reply evidence in a true Browne v. Dunn situation may lengthen the hearing.