Author: aleks

A team from European law firm, Fieldfisher, renowned for its innovative approach, worked with TrialView to navigate a complex case before the Competition Appeal Tribunal. The case in question was highlighted by The Lawyer as one of its “Top 20 cases for 2023” and led by the highly regarded regulatory and competition litigation Partner Richard Pike, and a team comprising Director Simon Yeung, Associates Agnieszka Szewczyk and Alicja Dijakiewicz and Senior Paralegal Andreas Killi, amongst others.

The Challenge

The nature of the case demanded the creation of confidentiality rings, i.e., restricted access to confidential information by specific individuals or groups. Ensuring the security of the confidential data was paramount, with manual methods of managing confidentiality simply untenable due to the scale and complexity, as well as the pace, of this case.

The Solution

The Fieldfisher team partnered with TrialView and the Defendants’ lawyers to tailor the TrialView software to facilitate compliance with the Tribunal’s confidentiality order, whilst providing access to all registered users in a single, combined workspace.

How did this look in practice?

• With robust user authentication protocols, only authorised individuals had access to the confidential information. Two-factor authentication and role-based access control were key components.The most confidential information was only visible to parties within a court ordered inner confidentiality ring, while less sensitive but still confidential material was visible to those in an outer confidentiality ring. Users who were not members of the inner or outer confidentiality rings were able to view redacted versions of confidential material.
• Permission settings on TrialView facilitated the designation of users into teams and specific roles, with each role aligned to their individual membership of the confidentiality rings.
• Special controls ensured that a user would only have access to the version of the document they were entitled to see.
• Evidence presentation was designed so that different users could see different versions of the same document simultaneously (based on the log in credentials).
• Version control facilitated consistency of pagination, structure and tabbing.
• Dynamic watermarking ensured that exports and bundles contained the correct confidentiality designation, ensuring that any shared document could be traced back to source.
• Exports and bundles of documents could also be set to align to the recipient’s confidentiality ring membership.

What were the results?

The additional confidentiality ring functionality significantly enhanced the useability of the database, minimising concerns around disclosure of confidential information to those without the necessary rights to view such information and complying with users’ confidentiality undertakings and the Tribunal’s confidentiality order. Having the different confidential variants in one workspace made working and updating the trial bundle easier.

Fieldfisher Director, Simon Yeung, commented on his experience with TrialView:

“TrialView has an intuitive interface and was straightforward to use. The support from the team at TrialView was very responsive, including the implementation of the confidentiality ring functionality.”

Fieldfisher is one of a leading number of visionary firms who recognise the efficiency gains from embracing innovation and technology at an early stage in a dispute.

Why not get in touch with one of our consultants to find out more?

 

eBundling provides several benefits and allows legal professionals to expedite the bundling process and work with enhanced speed and efficiency.

However, navigating new court guidelines can still be challenging, which is why we have created a refresher on eBundling which provides a useful overview on the core requirements to help you get ready for trial.

This information is for educational purposes only; for a full overview of the Commercial Court requirements, please click here.

What is a court bundle?

Firstly, what is a court bundle? Simply, a court bundle is no more or less than a collection of documents which are considered to be relevant to a case.

A core bundle should contain only the most important documents which are to be relied upon in the case.

Key points to consider when creating a court bundle

Courts now require only electronic bundles to be filed, unless hard-copy bundles are requested by the Judge specifically.

Co-operation between the parties is a duty required by all legal representatives when it comes to bundling.

Your up-to-date guide to eBundling

1. Bundle Formats

All hearing bundles (save for the core bundle) should be combined into one .pdf file. The file name for each .pdf should contain: the Claim No., a short version of the case name, and an indication of the number/letter of the bundle – e.g. “Bundle A (CL-2022-000111), Smith v Bloggs”.

All significant documents should be bookmarked, and should contain the page number of the document.

Individual bundles should be indexed, and the index should be searchable. A separate index or table of contents should be provided, and indexed documents should be hyperlinked. No more than one copy of each document should be provided, unless there is a justifiable reason.

2. Cross Referencing

Cross-referencing is central and prescriptive to the new guideline changes; it aids the Judge in quickly being able to understand the relationship between documents, particularly where specific exhibits or witness statements mention or rely on specific documents.

Hyperlinking is an easy and routine way to cross-reference across your bundle.

3. Core Bundle Requirements

Each page should bear its main bundle and page number reference and should be separately paginated. It must also be in PDF format.

Additionally, bundles must be lodged with the Court by 4pm on the working day before the first day or the trial or hearing.

4. General Guidance

Large electronic files can be slow to transmit and unwieldy to use and therefore should be avoided where possible. Therefore, bundles should only contain documents and authorities which are necessary for the hearing.

Additionally, each bundle needs to be named concisely, identifying its type.

5. Document Formats

Documents must be subject to OCR and should appear in portrait mode, save for bundles which contain only landscape-format documents, such as spreadsheets. Metadata should also be removed.

Download the full guide to commercial court bundling guidelines today to discover more about the how your court bundles should be presented.

Make complex court bundling easy with TrialView

TrialView offers one platform for great results, enabling fast and efficient bundle creation and allowing you to work with speed and efficiency for every aspect of your case.

Our award-winning solutions for e-bundling, case preparation, and evidence presentation is powered by AI technology and trusted by law firms, courts, and tribunals across the world.

If you’d like to find out more about the benefits of TrialView and how it can help ensure court compliance, get in touch today to learn more about our court bundling software.

Alternatively, book a tailored demo here.

The Rise of the Litigation Workspace

Litigation is undergoing a quiet revolution. Underpinning these changes are powerful AI and ChatGPT tools, which are ultimately changing how we work, and impacting on outcomes. The days of manual processes are numbered. Digital tools are now commonplace in litigation. But the next phase of development will see a harnessing of these tools to bring efficiencies never thought possible – with implications for those who do not adapt. .

Eimear McCann and Michael Wilkinson question whether we need a profession-wide approach to reduce the environmental impact of litigation in the latest edition of the New Law Journal.

With increasing pressure to meet ESG commitments, should the courts push for more sustainable litigation, by leveraging technology; and do we need rule reform to see a complete shift in mindset and practice?

Legal case management software TrialView has won the Best Technology Product award at The Lawyer Awards 2022.

TrialView is designed to simplify the trial process by allowing legal teams to manage and share case information, evidence, and documents in a secure and user-friendly platform. The software also provides real-time updates and analytics, allowing for better collaboration and decision-making.

The award recognises TrialView’s innovative approach to improving the legal industry and streamlining the trial process. TrialView’s CTO, Frank Brooks said “TrialView has been built from the ground up for scale and security. We are delighted to be recognised by the Lawyer Awards, and will continue to push boundaries, building our vision for the future of litigation.

Read more on LawNews’ website

Law firm DAC Beachcroft has adopted the virtual courtroom platform TrialView for use in its Irish offices.

TrialView enables legal teams to manage and share case information, evidence, and documents securely and in real-time, simplifying the trial process. The platform also provides virtual courtroom capabilities, allowing lawyers to attend and participate in remote hearings and trials. DAC Beachcroft is the latest law firm to adopt TrialView, which has gained popularity for its user-friendly interface and innovative approach to streamlining the legal industry.

“The applications of TrialView stretch beyond inquiries,” said commercial litigation partner Lisa Broderick, who heads up DACB’s Dublin office. “It is also very suitable for commercial litigation and mediations and to use as a secure data room in crisis situations. It’s a very exciting technology and provides a solution with countless benefits for our clients.”

Read more on LegalTechnology.com’s website