• Internal merit: the lawyer should evaluate conflicting legal values implicated directly in the client’s claim or goal. That is, there are 3 general types of tensions that the lawyer must resolve before pressing ahead with the client’s cause. 1. Substance vs Procedure: the more reliable the relevant procedures and institutions, then the less responsibility the lawyer needs to assume for the substantive justice of the resolution. The lawyer is the best decision-maker in this context. 2. Purpose vs Form: Legal procedures exist to systematically promote accurate decision-making, but the lawyer, being the individual with the most information about a particular claim, can subvert purpose by invoking formal, procedural rules to stifle the truth. The lawyer must seek to do the opposite, and if the situation is unclear, he/she must fall back on the formal procedures. 3. Broad vs Narrow Framing: Legal ideals promote narrow framing of disputes to limit state intrusion into the private sphere, but this can often ignore important considerations involving identity, relationships and social circumstances. The lawyer must often broaden the definition of disputes in order to make an effective, meaningful decision. This would normally involve plausible interpretations of the law, substantive resolutions and a consideration of the equality of resources between the parties.
The most concise and updated Legal Professional Conduct Study Notes for Australian Law Students.
Includes Model Exams and Model Exam Answers.
(Click here to purchase just the Notes)
Approximately 23672 words over 52 pages. Prepared in 2019.