Open PDF - Self represented Litigants a challenge - Size 786 KB

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
The need for advice but the limitations on the availability of
Legal Aid are recognised
44 While there was general appreciation of the resources presently available
to parties, there was also a unanimous and absolute recognition of the need
for parties to be both informed and advised at an early point about the law
and practice in the areas in which the dispute arose. The disparity in
practice about the provision of duty lawyers and the attitude of the various
Legal Aid Commissions about the potential conflict of interest was noted.
45 Unbundling of legal services is a relevant issue here but it did not get
discussed during the workshop to any depth, primarily because the issues
are not relevant to the models under consideration.
46 One particular suggestion on advice was the need for guidance about the
likely percentage outcomes (in financial matters), possibly like the Child
Support calculator. It would need to take into account the fact that there is
no statutory formula and include reference to the grounds on which the
court might make decisions to vary the likely outcome. One SRL also
thought the Court should be enabled to provide advice on the best avenues
to assistance, actual referrals rather than just information. This would have
to follow exchange of information sufficient to know what the problems are.
McKenzie Friend
47 There was extensive discussion about the nature and limitations upon the
provision of this assistance to self-representing litigants. The judicial
officers indicated universally that they were prepared to allow McKenzie
Friends to speak on behalf of self-represented litigants on some occasions.
Interestingly, the self-representing litigants themselves, were not as
committed as might have been expected to having someone available to
speak. They did all however emphasis the importance of having someone
at court to talk things over with, perhaps to get a different perspective from
and generally to help with the organisation of material in court. It was,
again, universally agreed that it was preferable if that person could sit at the
Bar table to assist in that process of organisation.
66
48 One self represented litigant was anxious that there should be some
registration process, not so much to qualify a McKenzie Friend on a semiprofessional
basis, but rather to provide a contact point with that person in
relation to the proceedings. In effect it was, on his part, a desire that he
should be recognised, as genuinely a person committed to assisting the
Court if he should attend with a self-represented litigant. He also expressed
frustration at the attitude of some members of the legal profession, many of
whom refuse to speak with him.