Self-study
P1
In October 1999, the Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (LRCWA) issued its report, "Review of the Civil and Criminal Justice System." Buried within its 400 pages are several important recommendations for introducing contingency fees for lawyers' services into the state of Western Australia. ███████████████ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███ █████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ ████ ██ █████████ █████ ████ ███████ █████████ ██████ ███████ █████
Context ·
LRCWA introduced contingency-fee agreements
These are agreements where a lawyer is paid only if the case is successful. Because of the higher risk involved, contingency fees tend to be higher than regular fees.
P2
████████ █████ ███ ███████ █████ ██ ███████████████ █████████████ ███ █████ ███ ███████████ ████ ████ ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ████████ ███ █████████████ █████ ██ ███ ████ ██ █ ██████████ ███████ ███████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ███ ████████ ██████ ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ ███
LRCWA recommends uplift Fee ·
A type of contingency fee
"Uplift" in the sense that a lawyer's regular fee will be paid plus a fixed additional percentage.
LRCWA Rationale ·
Prevent lawyers from disproportionate gain
And hence safeguards just compensation to plaintiffs.
LRCWA Recommendation Details ·
Two requirements for uplift fees
1. This contingency-fee arrangement must be used only a last resort; 2. The lawyer must know that the client is unable to pay normal fee.
P3
██████████████ █████ ████ ███████████████ ███████ ███████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ ███████████ ███ ████ ███ █████ ██████ █████████ ███ ████████ ███████████ ███ ████ ███ █████████ █████████████ ██ ███ █████████ ██████ ███ ███ ████████ ████ ██ ███ ███████████ ████ ███████ █████ ██████ ██ ███████ ███ █ ██████ ██ ████████ ███ █████ ██ █████ ██ ███ ████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ ████ ████████ ████ ██ ██████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████ █████
Critique ·
Too onerous for lawyers
Requires lawyers to investigate client's financial circumstances and estimate probable cost of litigation.
P4
██ ████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ███ ████████ ███ ████████ ██ ████ ███████████████ ██████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███████ █████ ██ ██████ ██ █████ ████████ ████ ███████████ █████ ████████ █████ ███████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ ███████ █████ ██ ██████████ ████████████ ██ █████████████ ██████ ██ ████ ███████ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ██ ████ ██ █████████ ██████ ██ ███ ███ █████ ██ █ ██████ ███
Critique ·
Unfair; limits freedom of contract
Why should contingency-fee agreements be available to only the least well-off clients?
Critique ·
Main reasons for contingency-fee agreements apply to everyone
1. to provide a way to finance litigation; 2. to shift risk of loss to lawyers.
Critique ·
Contingency-fee agreements better align interests
It gives lawyers skin in the game and so should increase their diligence and commitment.
Passage Style
Critique or debate
23.
The author's main purpose in ███ ███████ ██ ██
a
defend a proposed ██████ ███████ █████████
Anti-supported. The author does not defend the LRCWA’s reforms against criticism, he criticizes them himself.
b
identify the current ████████████ ██ █ █████ ██████ ███ ███████ ███ █████ ██████ ██ ████████
The author identifies the shortcomings of certain legal reforms— the LRCWA’s contingency-fee recommendations. He doesn’t address the shortcomings of the entire legal system.
c
support the view ████ █ ███████████ ██████ █████ ████████ ██████ ███ █████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███████
The uplift fee is intended to prevent lawyers from gaining disproportionately from damage awards. The author never claims that the uplift fee will worsen this situation. His main purpose is to criticize the LRCWA’s contingency-fee recommendations by pointing out some of their consequences.
d
show that a █████ ██████ █████ ███ ██ █████████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ████████ ███████ ████ ███████
The author doesn’t argue that the legal system would not be changed if the LRCWA’s proposed reforms were implemented. Instead, his main purpose is to criticize these reforms by pointing out their consequences.
e
explain a suggested ██████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ██
This accurately describes the author’s main purpose. He explains the the LRCWA’s contingency-fee recommendations in P1 and P2, and critically evaluates them in P3 and P4.