Queen's Inn

I attended the annual Queen's Inn dinner at Queen's College, where the speaker was Justice Marcia Neave.

I have to say that the College under the leadership of the present master, Prof David Runia, seems to be travelling impressively (at least, from what I can see, from afar).   In particular, it appears to have successfully handled the transition of Melbourne University to the so-called "Melbourne Model".  This involves professional entry degrees all being post-graduate.   In the case of law, this is the JD.

For Melbourne's colleges, with their traditional focus on under-graduates, this has required a bit of a step-change in order to appeal to a greater range of post-graduates.   We were told that, this year, Queen's has 10 students in residence undertaking the JD, which seems quite good.




Justice Neave's speech was directed at the mostly under and recent-graduate audience, and appeared to hit the mark.  Her main themes were women in the law (basically, they started from a long way behind, there's been progress, but there's still more to be done) and some reflections on her life in the law.  She also reflected on the fact that more people are graduating in law than will ever work as lawyers (see my post here on this aspect). 

EDIT:  For completeness, here's my post on this dinner in 2012.

Legal Education

I was indebted to an article in the Australian for drawing my attention to a speech by (Victorian) Chief Justice Marilyn Warren  (the Fiat Justitia lecture, a link to the text is here) regarding a number of aspects of legal education in Australia.   Her speech covered quite a lot of ground, and it was good to see these issues getting some exposure.

One of the issues she mentioned is that the universities are producing far more law graduates than can ever be employed as a lawyer.    On a per capita basis, the number is far higher in Australia than it is in the US.  In one sense, this is not all bad news, because a law degree can be a good form of generalist education.  After all, how many arts graduates are employed as historians or whatever their major may have been?   Moreover, if the places in law courses aren't available, they will become even more elitist than they are now (I'm not sure that the brightest VCE students will necessarily become the best lawyers).

However, this seems to have the result that the universities are responding to the demand for places in law courses by turning law into a generalised degree that fails to include some matters the judiciary considers important.  She didn't say this, of course, but my informal observation is that these days there is quite an emphasis on "sociological" subjects, dealing with human rights and similar issues.  But she did say that the way in which subjects are taught has changed, and that the teaching in some core areas is, "at least disappointing and in many respects unsatisfactory."  She also says that it, "it is unfortunate that law students typically spend years studying the law before they find out what it is like to practice law".  And she sends a shot over the universities' bows, saying, "if the university sector persists with the generalist direction a solution for legal practice effectiveness is needed".  She moots various possibilities, including an "admission to practice" exam (akin to the bar exam sin the US) or even a cap on the number of lawyers (the aspect that the Australian chose as the subject of its headline).

Justice Warren's speech is worth reading in its entirety. I hope the law schools take it on board.

Legal profession -- "be nice"

Lawyers are supposed to be "professionals".  But it seems they need to be reminded!  On the same day in November, there were two such reminders.

First,  the Victorian Legal Services Commissioner sent out an "alert" to lawyers, to the general effect that he wasn't impressed by a rise in complaints made by lawyers to other lawyers, such as threats of legal action being taken against the lawyer for the other side.  An example is where a threat is made to pursue costs personally from the other lawyer.   The Commissioner said that the "aggressive and personal tone" of these interactions "demonstrates professional conduct which falls far short of the standard expected....".

And, on the same day,  the High Court handed down a decision to the effect that if documents are mistakenly provided to the other side (during the discovery process), they have to be returned.  In this case, the firm that had received the documents sent as a result of an obvious mistake was ordered to return them - and their client had to pay the costs of this part of the litigation (all the way to the High Court)!    The courts recognise that mistakes will occur in large commercial cases, and lawyers have professional and ethical obligations to support the proper administration of justice.

Now, all that remains is for some elements in the profession to take heed of the Court's  comments along the lines that "speed and efficiency" are essential in legal proceedings....!

Lowering costs.....

The professional services firm with which I am associated has a strong European network.  It recently told us that it is opening a new office in Glasgow which will provide business support and legal services to its European offices, although the immediate plans are focused solely on support for London. It's all part of what is said to be "increasing demands for ... firms to take more responsibility for delivering services cost efficiently".  And keeping costs down so as to maintain profitability.........?

Perhaps this comes in the same category as near-shoring jobs to New Zealand?

Although out (near?)-sourcing from London to Glasgow is somewhat removed from out-sourcing from, say, Australia to an Asian country, there's a trend here.   There are many services that can be provided from a distance, especially in the "back office" area:  transcription of dictation, accounting functions, IT support and so on.  There are also fairly routine professional taks that can be undertaken remotely.  Presumably costs in Glasgow are cheaper  than in London, although I wonder if a Scottish location may also have something to do with contingency planning in the event of the Scots deciding to leave the UK?