find the latest legal job
Corporate Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Highly-respected, innovative and entrepreneurial Not-for-Profit · Competency based Board
View details
Chief Counsel and Company Secretary
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: Newcastle, Maitland & Hunter NSW
· Dynamic, high growth organisation · ASX listed market leader
View details
In-house Projects Lawyer | Renewables / Solar | 2-5 Years PQE
Category: Generalists - In House | Location: All Australia
· Help design the future · NASDAQ Listed
View details
Insurance Lawyer (3-5 PAE)
Category: Insurance and Superannuation Law | Location: Brisbane CBD & Inner Suburbs Brisbane QLD
· Dynamic organisation ·
View details
Real Estate & Projects Lawyer (6+ years PAE)
Category: Property Law | Location: Sydney CBD, Inner West & Eastern Suburbs Sydney NSW
· Top tier firm with offices nationally · High profile clients
View details
All quiet on eDiscovery

All quiet on eDiscovery

THE FEDERAL Court might be ready for the digital age, but it’s not yet willing to commit to a concrete commencement date for its Court Note outlining new rules on the discovery of electronic…

THE FEDERAL Court might be ready for the digital age, but it’s not yet willing to commit to a concrete commencement date for its Court Note outlining new rules on the discovery of electronic documents.

The Court Note, similar to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure released in the United States in 2006, has far-reaching consequences for the means to electronic discovery — eDiscovery — across Australia. By digitalising the discovery process, practitioners will be required to agree on document formats and other factors determining the parameters on eDiscovery.

Upon the announcement and release of the draft of the Court Note last year, 1 July was slated as the official commencement date, and 1 October marked as its mandate. With that July date now gone, some industry experts appear none the wiser as to when exactly the legal technology will be mandated as part of the discovery process in litigation.

When Lawyers Weekly contacted the Federal Court for further information, the primary contact was not available to speak with us before press deadline, but a spokesperson suggested that internal review of the draft note was still in progress. “The likely introduction date at this time, to allow completion of consultation, is not before 1 October 2008,” she said.

According to Annette Hughes, a partner with Allens Arthur Robinson, the consultation was likely to be about the provisions on the pre-discovery conference checklist: “Once those are settled and everyone is happy with them it will be released,” she said.

Those provisions are possibly the biggest changes the rules are likely to present to lawyers. Exactly what will be expected of practitioners as part of the pre-discovery conference, in which both sides of a case will determine the parameters on how electronic documents will be discovered, is still being confirmed.

Hughes said the commencement date had been a bit of a mystery, but that correspondence from the Federal Court had indicated further details would appear online shortly, because consolidation on the draft was still in progress.

At Blake Dawson, Emma Forbes, special counsel in the legal technology group, said her clients have not expressed much concern over the changes, but appear confused as to what will be required. “When you try and advise them on what they should be doing so that it’s not going to be a nightmare if this [online eDiscovery] happens, it makes them a little anxious,” she said.

Forbes added that at the Victorian Society for Computers and the Law’s recent eDiscovery conference, delegates were still confused about the commencement date on the rules.

But no matter what the commencement date, both Hughes and Forbes are positive about the imminent changes. Hughes said: “The aim is to make parties get a grip on discovery early, in a way that can be cost effective, and to also agree on the format that everyone is using.

“The other impact from the court’s perspective will be that they can manage and control the format of what’s exchanged and produced for the court,” Hughes said.

See our eDiscovery feature in the Best Practice section on page 22

Like this story? Read more:

QLS condemns actions of disgraced lawyer as ‘stain on the profession’

NSW proposes big justice reforms to target risk of reoffending

The legal budget breakdown 2017

All quiet on eDiscovery
lawyersweekly logo
Promoted content
Recommended by Spike Native Network
more from lawyers weekly
Professionals unite in support of marriage equality
The presidents of representative bodies for solicitors, barristers and doctors in NSW have come toge...
Aug 21 2017
Is your firm on the right track for gig economy gains?
Promoted by Crowd & Co. The way we do business, where we work, how we engage with workers, ev...
Scales of Justice, Victorian County Court, retiring judges
Aug 21 2017
Replacements named for retired Vic judges
Two new judicial officers have been appointed in the Victorian County Court, following the retire...
Allens managing partner Richard Spurio, image courtesy Allens' website
Jun 21 2017
Promo season at Allens
A group of lawyers at Allens have received promotions across its PNG and Australian offices. ...
May 11 2017
Partner exits for in-house role
A Victorian lawyer has left the partnership of a national firm to start a new gig with state governm...
Esteban Gomez
May 11 2017
National firm recruits ‘major asset’
A national law firm has announced it has appointed a new corporate partner who brings over 15 years'...
Nicole Rich
May 16 2017
Access to justice for young transgender Australians
Reform is looming for the process that young transgender Australians and their families must current...
Geoff Roberson
May 11 2017
The lighter side of the law: when law and comedy collide
On the face of it, there doesn’t seem to be much that is amusing about the law, writes Geoff Rober...
May 10 2017
Advocate’s immunity – without fear or without favour but not both
On 29 March 2017, the High Court handed down its decision in David Kendirjian v Eugene Lepore & ...