Blog

For non-lawyers, there is often a notion that the law is clear, cohesive and logical. Sometimes the course of cases, from the lower courts to the higher courts, show how even judges can form different views on the same facts, and in applying the same legal tests as one judgement is reversed by another. One could be forgiven for thinking that judges are doing themselves into a job, and that by writing and formulating legal tests in the way it is done the occasion is set for another judge or the same judges having to interpret the issue again in the future on different facts. In truth, the law is quite complex, and reasonable minds may simply differ on what the law says and this is a natural part of its evolution rather than a point of criticism. Vicarious liability probably illustrates this better than any other area of the law.

The article examines leading lawyer guides in Australia, highlighting the complexities and pitfalls in their ranking methodology. Written by an unranked lawyer, it questions the objectivity of these guides, citing challenges in subjective assessments, confidentiality constraints, peer review biases, and the odd ranking of lawyers who never appear in reported cases. The piece calls for a discerning approach to these guides, recognizing their limitations.

The proliferation of AI tools in the legal sector, with their promise of affordable and easier access to legal advice, has been met with mixed results. Despite their intention to simplify legal language, these tools often oversimplify, leading to critical omissions and potential legal pitfalls. A case in point is the removal of essential "in writing" clauses in contracts, which could result in serious contractual breaches if misunderstood. This raises questions about the liability of both users and AI providers, the latter potentially facing claims of misrepresentation, negligence, or breach of the Australian Consumer Law. Far from rendering lawyers redundant, these issues highlight the enduring value of the profession and the necessity for stringent regulation in legal tech. Providers of AI legal tools should be wary; a basic lesson in law may be on their horizon.

An often overlooked aspect in the heat of a dispute is the possibility of having a commercial mediation. Its purpose is simple, reduce costs, complexity and delays by allowing the parties an ideal opportunity to explore reaching their own agreement. Often this is the best outcome, and the savings can be enormous in terms of your time, reduced angst and in a monetary sense. Read more about commercial mediation.

Deciding on a mediator is not an easy task. To help you decide on a mediator, we have listed some of the considerations, other than obvious ones such as costs, to facilitate your decision on who is the right mediator for your case. Whilst it can be tempting to choose a former judge, or silk or an experienced lawyer - the decision involves a few factors to consider including the benefits and problems that each may bring to the task. Read to find out more ...

Thinking of mediating your dispute with a mediation service? Considerations include: understanding mediation services, knowing the benefits of mediation over litigation, appreciating the success rates of mediation and more. Read our blog to learn about this.

Ever wonder what, exactly, a mediator does? Here is a short, sharp to the point summary of some of the main steps taken and facilitated by the mediator.

Litigation is known for its toxicity: it is characterized by complexity, rapid financial drain, and an unpredictability of duration. These factors create a somewhat hazardous environment that leads many to question - is there a better way to resolve it?

In this blog, we explore the risks and circumstances where personal cost orders may be made against solicitors in litigation cases. We discuss the practical steps that lawyers can take to limit their exposure to personal cost orders and protect their interests. By understanding the factors that courts focus on and the statutory provisions that apply, lawyers can navigate these risks more effectively. We also highlight the importance of seeking separate representation and providing written documentation to support their case. By following these steps, lawyers can minimize the financial and reputational consequences of personal cost orders.

Litigant is developing a comprehensive Mediation Toolkit, designed to enhance the existing skills of experienced legal professionals. The toolkit will offer a detailed overview of mediation, a template for invitation letters, a list of mediation service providers, and a mediation preparation guide. This resource aims to provide additional perspectives and highlight any aspects that might have been overlooked in mediation preparation and execution. The toolkit is designed to be used as a guide and can be adapted to suit individual approaches and case specifics. The Mediation Toolkit will be released soon, offering practical resources and insightful guidance to the legal community.