All posts by tlf_admin

Interview | Andrew Mellett (Plexus)

As CEO of Plexus, Andrew Mellett is on a mission to transform the value of legal services.  Co-founding the company in 2011, he now leads a team of lawyers, technologists and engineers across five countries in building what has been described as a game-changer for legal operations.

Plexus launched Legal Gateway, the world’s first legal operating system, in 2016, and already it’s being used by in-house legal teams at over 200 of the world’s largest organisations including L’Oreal, Samsung, Woolworths, Spotify, General Mills, Coca Cola and General Motors.  Driving this growth is a fresh approach to the law coupled with the world’s most advanced legal technology.

Plexus has been profiled as a case study in the disruption of the professional services industry by HBR, INSEAD, ACU and RMIT, and Andrew’s thought leadership can often be found published in the AFR, Sydney Morning Herald, ALB, Lawyers Weekly and The Age.

Our remarkable Victorian President, Sophie Tversky, was fortunate to pick Andrew’s brain recently.

Why did you decide to found Plexus?

My co-founder and I believe that business, when done right, is a powerful lever to reshape and improve the world.  We saw an industry where both clients and lawyers were unhappy with the paradigm, and we believed there had to be a better way.

Plexus’ vision and mission is to “Create the Future of The Law” and your mission is to: “Transform the value of Legal’ for the benefit of our clients, our people, and the community.” What does this mean to you?

If you think about it, the law is the best mechanism we’ve found to guide society.  It provides certainty, access to justice, and is the connective tissue of value creation.  It’s also slow, unpredictable and incredibly expensive. We want to create a future where access to the value that ‘The Law’ provides is as easy, efficient, and reliable as turning on a tap.  And we want everyone to win from that.

What does being a lawyer mean in the 21st century?

‘The Law’ has profited for a long time from information arbitrage (i.e. “we know the law, and if you want to access that knowledge you need to pay us a premium and deal with a heap of eccentricities built into our model”).  Through a confluence of technological change, and deregulation, that information asymmetry is rapidly dissolving.  You can now Google a legal question and get a reasonable answer, or you can get onto our Legal Gateway platform and get a legal task done in 10% of the time it used to take, for a fraction of the cost.  This trend is only beginning too.

We see three major outcomes from this trend; some positive for lawyers and some negative:

  1. Many lawyers won’t choose (or be able) to evolve their skill sets rapidly enough to generate value in this new paradigm. This, when coupled with an oversupply of legal grads, will result in compression of salaries at the bottom end of the market.
  2. On the flip side, a huge amount of the boring routine work that used to drive dissatisfaction with legal careers, will be automated. Replacing many of these roles will be an enormous range of interesting new career paths. Each year in our business we create roles that previously didn’t exist in the Legal industry.  Examples include: Legal Consultant, Legal Knowledge Engineer, Customer Success Manager, project manager, along with a range of commercial roles that lawyers can be uniquely qualified for.   This will be an enormous net gain for those that remain in the industry.
  3. The legal professionals who will win are those who position themselves to benefit from the ‘tailwinds’ of this transformation. There will likely be a shortage of talent for the roles listed above, which will mean those who have the skills will benefit from the positive growth cycles of the transformation. Equally, although there will be fewer, there will still be some extraordinarily well paid ‘traditional lawyers’, however these lawyers are less likely to create value through ‘documentation’ and more likely to be rewarded for what we call ‘path finding’ – using their deep understanding of domains to solve complex problems for clients.

You conducted research last year that revealed over 3/4 of clients did not believe they got value for money from their legal service providers. How can this be improved?

If you look at it, what every customer wants is a solution to their problem that is ‘faster, better, and cheaper’.  To the frustration of their clients, law firms have traditionally suggested that they can only have one of those three.  Their ‘hourly rate’ charging model has incentivized behavior that over-indexes on quality to the utmost detriment of speed and cost, when in fact speed has the greatest correlation with customer satisfaction.  The result?  An industry average Net Promoter Score of 16%.

On the contrary, Jeff Besos has built one of the largest enterprises in the world with a simple strategy:  Faster, Better, Cheaper – and has dominated industries through successfully combining all three.

The answer to your question is two fold:

  1. As Charlie Munger says ‘show me an incentive and I will show you a behaviour’. Law firms need to shift their incentives to align with client outcomes. We have proved at Plexus that using value based pricing and measuring NPS on each matter transforms how you think about client success (as a result our NPS is five times higher than the industry).
  2. Ultimately, we believe that we are at the start of a wave of what Schumpeter called ‘creative destruction’. As clients recognize that there are better alternatives we will see growth in those organisations that are truly client centric, at the cost of intransigent incumbents.

Legal roles and titles are changing in this fast-moving legal landscape: what do you think are some of the new roles that will be created in the next 5-10 years?

The application of technology is going to drive a lot of this, hence there will be a huge amount of hybrid computer science/legal roles, and many more business/legal roles.  Some we are seeing are:

  • Legal Consultant
  • Legal Business Analyst
  • Legal Project Manager
  • Legal Support
  • Legal QA
  • Legal Knowledge Engineer
  • Along with Lawyers going into Sales, Marketing, Management etc.

Where do you see Plexus evolving as a business?

We have been at the vanguard of many of the largest transitions the industry has seen over the last seven years, and we hope to remain at the forefront in creating ‘The Future of The Law’.

We are investing aggressively in three spaces:

  • Thought our Legal Gateway business we are building technology enablers for lawyers and Legal Automation for business people. We have proven we can ‘put your best lawyer, on their best day, on every desktop in the enterprise, 24 hours a day’.
  • Through our wildly successful Promotion Wizard We are building out a range of products that we call ‘Legal Service as a Software’ that, although are legal services, technology does 90% of the heavy lifting, leaving our lawyers to serve their clients.
  • Through Plexus Engage we are continuing our push to provide a more flexible career options for lawyers, while providing more dynamic solutions for clients to bridge the capability and capacity gaps in their businesses., thus reducing unnecessary outsourcing.
  • Finally, in line with our ‘Everybody Wins’ business philosophy we have recently kicked off an initiative called Plexus Impact to take our technology and expertise and build free solutions that assist less privileged people in the community to address their legal needs. We hope, in time, that this social initiative will eclipse the impact Plexus has had on the legal industry.

What do you see as critical skills for new law graduates?

For a long time it was believed that success in the legal industry required zero technical expertise, though The Law as a monoline skillset is in the process of being disrupted.  Those who will succeed in the legal industry of the future will have lateral skill sets that they can apply to create value in unique ways.  I would advise law grads to combine law with business, engineering or computer science, and develop soft skills that cannot be replicated by technology.

How do you think the role of General Counsel will change?

General Counsels are different to their executive peers, as for the most parts that are lateral hires out of law firms.  While the CFO or Head of Marketing may have ‘moved in house’ from a consulting provider in their 20s, the GC often get’s parachuted in from a law firm after they make partner. The challenge of course is that the skills that are required to be a successful partner are incredibly different to those required to be an executive in a large enterprise.   Given this blind spot, many try to assemble an ‘inhouse law firm’ – ultimately failing the business.

Leading GCs in the future will borrow from the successful playbook used in other functions (Finance, HR, IT etc).  They will attempt to centralise, standardise and automate routine legal work into Legal Operations Hubs (much like financial shared service centers), and compress the cost and time of these activities.  They will then reallocate those resources to establish ‘Legal Business Partners’ who we call ‘pathfinders’.  They will be tasked with navigating complexity to generate competitive advantage for the organization.   This will then free the GC up to transition from ‘The Company Lawyer’ to a strategically important executive.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Review | NSW Young Lawyers Golden Gavel

Ravi Nayyar, member of TLF NSW, recently attended the New South Wales Young Lawyers Golden Gavel.  He has written this fantastic review!

18 May 2018 was what the emcee, and our learned friend, Emily ‘Victoria’ Aitken, described as ‘the legal profession’s morning of mornings’. The NSW Young Lawyers Golden Gavel, a sort of pilgrimage for lawyers who enjoy ten brave souls criticising our ‘beloved’ profession. All in the name of good fun. An institution likely as important as the law itself, and proudly running since 1993. The event comprised a terrific mixture of public speaking, stand-up comedy, and cold, hard, facts about the practice of law (well, sort of). It even closed with some wit from The Honourable Justice Fabian Gleeson of the NSW Court of Appeal, patron of NSW Young Lawyers, and a member of the judging panel.

I had the privilege of attending this event, which The Honourable Justice Margaret Beazley once described as ‘the Eurovision of the legal profession’, as a guest of The Legal Forecast. As a lover of stand-up comedy, particularly the self-deprecating kind, I had an awesome time. I loved the calm musing of the winner, Tom Sorrenson, about the multitasking mindfulness of the modern lawyer, and we in the audience were somehow horrified, and amused, during his story about using a phone headset while typing, and somehow operating a sandwich press (burning a limb in the process). Another highlight was the Runner-Up, and People’s Choice Award-winner, Joshua Clarke, who pulled at heartstrings when stressing his love of practising in the Sydney CBD.

The speech that struck me the most, however, was Mama Puna Monica Florence Miranda’s. She cheekily, but incisively, criticised the predicament of lawyers faced with unnecessary, poorly executed, innovation in our beloved profession. Her concluding line captured this quite well:

‘Innovation, we’re absolutely obsessed with it. Don’t ask how we can fix it, though. We’re too busy trying to figure out how we can stuff it up the next time’.

Indeed, this reflects the issue with the very concept of innovation in the legal profession being over-hyped. And polluted by this very hype. At times, it is not even properly evaluated but simply slapped on members of the profession. Such innovation can be criticised as a problem in search of a solution; serving little purpose. Indeed, the argument could be made that this parallels the issue of innovation being properly designed, but poorly implemented, given similar negative results. Proponents of such problematic innovation may label their critics as Luddites, yet refuse to acknowledge that they are arguably a good deal of the source of the problem.

Miranda’s speech gives great examples of such problematic innovation (let’s unimaginatively use this phrase). Firstly, it discusses the role of informal methods of communication among a lawyer, and their secretary, in helping, allegedly, raise the productivity of both parties. But it pointedly questions the value of using memes in actually creating value for clients when it does not really hold either party accountable for their work (or lack thereof) in a reasonable fashion. It probably only provides momentary comic relief from a mountain of work. Secondly, Miranda chides her firm’s rolling out an open-plan office design as another artifice to fool clients who crave their legal eagles to innovate. Indeed, that firm failed to consider the possibility of some employees failing to respect necessary etiquette, which can thus hurt employees’ productivity, as Miranda argued, if they are distracted by the raucous conversations of colleagues about their latest Tinder escapade. Thirdly, and by far the most striking example of problematic innovation, was the PEXA e-conveyancing system, which, according to its website, is ‘digitally transforming the property exchange experience’. Miranda cleverly paints a portrait of a regtech solution, which, though well-intentioned, can have unbelievably expensive consequences in its implementation, even if by a top-tier firm, which presumably would have some of the best IT infrastructure in the CBD. Her use of statistics especially drives the point home: ‘4 lawyers, 103 billable hours, 87 email exchanges, and $6, 500 worth of write-off, [and] we had completed our first PEXA settlement’.

But even then, dear reader, you would be asking me: ‘Why the polemic when reviewing a stand-up gig?’

Well, I say this, as a friend of The Legal Forecast: I champion innovation, not problematic innovation. I consider the latter to be oxymoronic, which is why it utterly riles me. Why should problematic innovation even be ‘innovation’? If we make the mistake of considering it so, then our efforts to (as TLF’s mission states) ‘advance legal practice through technology and innovation’ are at nought. If we fail to call out examples of problematic innovation of the nature as Miranda highlights, then we must ask ourselves whether we truly are ‘passionate about disruptive thinking and access to justice’; whether we truly are committed to driving substantive, valuable, change to this beloved profession of ours; to helping the legal fraternity deliver greater value to even more individuals through greater access to justice, and more efficient legal practice. Change that we can believe in (to paraphrase a certain Presidential candidate’s slogan).

Indeed, I feel it not a matter of ‘if’, or ‘when’, the phenomenon of innovation in our beloved profession comes up. After all, we have seen quite a few names – big, and small, domestic, and global – in the law adopt innovations like artificial intelligence, machine learning, natural language processing, and smart contracts, to drive the aforementioned change. We are also seeing the members of our profession investigate even more exciting innovation. These are delivering results, especially in effectively automating routine tasks, thus freeing up lawyers to apply their faculties to more complex work, which delivers greater value to clients, and the broader community. Dear reader, the practice of law is becoming more nimble, more tailored for the client, and more efficient. We have even heard about how key innovations, like artificial neural networks, will enhance the capability of human lawyers by helping them make decisions that are more data-driven, and thus contextually-appropriate. Hence, dear reader, I feel it not a matter of ‘if’, or ‘when’. But ‘how’.

In answering this question, we as a profession must carefully watch out for problematic innovations like those criticised by Miranda, and nip this toxic species in the bud. Otherwise, we jeopardise the integrity of our #legaltech, and #newlaw, movement, which, I stress, is delivering tremendous value. Our wonderful movement must not be dismissed as a gimmick whose work is apparently not worth the paper it tends not to be printed on. We must be vigilant about the risk of problematic innovations corrupting our message. When we stand in our teams to discuss the next big thing, freshly sketched out on the whiteboard in front of us, we must (to borrow one of Sorrenson’s ideas) take a deep breath, reflect, and then ask ourselves the following:

How does this help make the practice of law more efficient, and/or drive access to justice?

Is this even necessary?

If we ask ourselves these questions while standing at that whiteboard, we would be sure to champion true innovation. We would be sure to avoid, as Miranda argues, ’trying to figure out how we can stuff it up the next time’.

Hence, we would truly, as The Legal Forecast seeks to do, leverage our creativity,  our entrepreneurialism, to effect change for the better in the practice of law.

To translate our correctly-held belief – that ‘technology has an important role to play in legal practice, and access to justice’ – into concrete action.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Interview | Bhaven Shah (Presolv360)

Bhaven Shah is the Co-Founder of Presolv360, which is India’s first homegrown cloud-based dispute management platform capable of preventing needless litigation, protecting people and businesses from adversities of disputes and resolving them through time-tested collaborative dispute resolution mechanisms. A Chartered Accountant and an alumnus of the prestigious Government Law College in Mumbai, India, Bhaven has had varied experience before judicial and quasi-judicial authorities including the Supreme Court of India, High Courts of Rajasthan and Bombay, and the erstwhile insolvency boards. He previously worked with KPMG in their M&A and tax litigation practice, R. K. Bothra & Co. and Ernst & Young in their tax and assurance practices, respectively.  We are very grateful that Michael Bidwell (TLF) had the opportunity to receive detailed answers to our pressing questions!

As India’s first dispute management platform, where did you get the inspiration to create Presolv360?

Thank you for this question because I love talking about it. In fact, I believe every entrepreneur has a reason, a story about where it all began. This is mine… Law came to me by legacy. In India, the mid-80s and 90s witnessed unprecedented changes – businesses expanded but so did complexities, opportunities increased but so did opportunistic individuals. The economy was growing but values were rapidly eroding. From property-grabbing to non-payment of dues, from trespassing to cheques bouncing, it became a usual occurrence for many of us. Practices and professions became sophisticated, but law and procedures remained unchanged.

In a heavily-litigated personal matter, a Supreme Court Judge (now retired) said to me in open court “Son, your father started this case and your child will have to conclude it.” And these wise words came after 29 years (read 45% of the lifespan of an average Indian) of fighting tooth and nail in Indian courts. The harsh reality is that legal cases in India last a life-time and have a propensity to wipe out all your resources, and I faced this first hand. I didn’t want to suffer in the future, I didn’t want others to suffer, ever, and so, it was time that India and her citizens were offered a solution that changed the way they insulated themselves from disputes and litigation. Something that was quick, economical, convenient and effective. With this in mind, Presolv360 was born.

On your website, you note a few mentors and advisors in addition to your founding team. What role do these mentors and advisors play in developing Presolv360?

Just as children are nurtured and guided by their parents, when it comes to a business, our mentors and advisors are the cornerstone of many important decisions. They are our anchors and often lead us back on track when we go astray. Mr. Ashok Barat is the former Managing Director and CEO, Forbes and Company Ltd, a publicly listed entity in India. He is currently on the Board of several listed companies and is passionate about making mediation the primary form of dispute resolution. Ms. Tanu Mehta is a practicing counsel, mediator and conciliator recognized by the Bombay High Court and is an MA in Conflict Resolution & Mediation from Tel Aviv University, Israel. Ms. Rajani Iyer has been designated a senior counsel by the Bombay High Court and is a mediator with over 4 decades of experience in dispute resolution.

While we are armed with the force of youth, enthusiasm and ideas, our mentors bring unparalleled experience, a balanced approach and advise that covers strategic, business and operational aspects. Basically, they justify the 360 in Presolv360.

You include several sample agreements on your website including employment, joint ventures, non-disclosure, website development, loan and will just to name a few! What made you decide to allow users to download and use them for free?  How do you protect your intellectual property by allowing free access to these documents?

Personal, and even professional and business relationships in India are primarily trust-based. It is obvious that it’s only those you trust that have the power to breach it. That’s why we encourage the ‘habit of codifying’ i.e. putting on paper what has been agreed upon. This is the foremost exercise that’ll help prevent needless litigation. We understand that majority people have accessibility and affordability issues when it comes to sound and proficient advice, and it is in order to circumvent this problem that we provide professionally drafted agreements free of cost. While we intend to increase the database to include more agreements, we have identified these as key areas vulnerable to disputes.

That being said, trust is yet the most important factor of any relationship. We have come to realise that India’s internet citizens are maturing and honing responsibility like never before. While providing leeway to our mature and responsible users, we mandate, log and document acceptance of our terms of use for the morally and ethically challenged ones. Any unauthorized use or distribution of the documents and materials available on the website would result into a breach of contract and would consequently be liable to action under Indian laws.

What were the initial challenges and rewards for you, Namita and Aman leaving your traditional corporate jobs to create Presolv360? Would you change anything if you could go back and do it again?

A corporate job is like sitting in an airplane with the seatbelt buckled, whereas the entrepreneurial path is like jumping from that airplane and learning how to build a parachute along the way!

Namita, Aman and I knew what was at stake, but what made us jump anyway was the desire of finding a solution apt for a country like India, with its myriad of cultures, traditions, beliefs and functioning mechanisms. While treading on an unknown path, it was challenging to up the awareness of people in the dispute management space. In fact, it is these very challenges that contributed towards shaping the entire structure of Presolv360, as much as it has contributed towards shaping us as individuals. It is rewarding going to bed each night, that we’ve utilized the day in starting a revolution, however small, and are progressing towards our vision of a dispute-free future.

We believe that we are at the right place – ‘India’, at the right time – ‘now’, and doing the right thing – ‘Presolv360’. Even if we could go back, we’d do the exact same thing all over again, because that is exactly what has got us thus far and is what will continue to take us further.

In the making of Presolv360, give us some ‘behind the scenes’ insights. What is your value proposition?

Disputes are inevitable and are inherent to the nature of humans. So, we re-imagined, re-engineered and radically improved the ‘approach’ to dispute management. After an extensive research and study, ranging from India’s village system to international diplomacy, from traditional dispute redressal machineries to sophisticated global practices, it was time to understand contemporary challenges. We undertook an ‘Appeal for Change’ survey where we interviewed over a thousand people from different walks of life to understand all the facets of disputes. It is on this robust foundation that we built and designed the Presolv360 platform.

Presolv360 is a unique dispute management platform that blends technology, human expertise and innovation to provide effective dispute prevention solutions, collaborative dispute resolution mechanisms, fast-track and cost-effective alternatives to courts and protection from uncertain outcomes and adversities. This makes Presolv360 the first of its kind across the globe!

I always ask people to ponder over three simple questions and they understand the problems we address:

  1. Would you like to enjoy a life free from disputes, litigation and courts?
  2. Do you want to secure yourself to ensure nobody drags you to court?
  3. If you have a dispute, would you not like to resolve it quickly, reasonably and efficiently?

I greatly appreciate your ‘Presolv for All’ Project where you charge a very nominal fee to those who are financially disadvantaged. It is remarkable to see start-ups working with and for the community.  What pushed you to start up this Project and are there any success stories you would like to share?

In reality, it was a success story that led us to undertake the ‘Presolv for All’ Project. A success for me, a success for Presolv360, a success for every stakeholder and a success for humanity. A poor lady had lost her husband in a tragic motor accident but unfortunately, that wasn’t the end of her tragedy. What followed were years of torturous litigation where she had to re-live the death of the bread-winner on one hand, and, on the other, raise three young children, repay debts and work to keep her family fed.

There was negligible progress for several years and going by precedents, it would be at least another decade before she would receive any relief from the courts. After our involvement, an amicable settlement was arrived at. Within 30 days, she received the compensation. With tears in her eyes, she said “You saved me. Thank you!”. The feeling of contentment engulfed us and at that moment, we decided to undertake this initiative, so we, as a community, can enjoy a litigation-free future.

I see you are currently located in Mumbai. Where would you love to expand to if the opportunity arises?

India is going through a crisis. Everyday 40,000+ cases are filed in India courts and approximately 67% disputants do not even attempt an alternative before litigating. India expends US$ 12 billion every year on court hearings and loss of business. This translates to 0.77% of India’s GDP and shockingly, this figure is without accounting for professional fees. While it takes an average of 13 years for the final disposal of a civil case, it is estimated that by the year 2025, there will be 61.9 million pending cases and at the current rate of filing of new cases against the rate of disposal, it will take 587 years to clear this backlog. The opportunity in India itself is magnanimous.

While we are based in Mumbai, our operations extend to the whole of India and this is possible because of our integrated tech platform that is accessible from desktops, laptops or mobile devices to ensures affordability, convenience, efficiency and effectiveness. The beneficiaries of this platform are unrestricted, be it individuals, businesses, institutions or even governments. Going forward, we aim to make Presolv360 not just an alternative mechanism to resolve disputes, but the most appropriate mechanism to manage disputes across the globe.

Does the government have any role to play? Do they support such innovative initiatives?

The Indian government under the leadership of Prime Minister Narendra Modi has undertaken path-breaking initiatives such as ‘Aadhaar’ (providing unique identification to 1.3 billion Indians), improving the ‘Ease of Doing Business’, ‘Digital India’, tackling logjam in courts and bettering the business and investment climate of the country. While, I believe that India is in extremely capable hands, it is also important to understand that, for India to tackle this grave problem, a concerted partnership is required between all stakeholders – potential and existing disputants, governments, judiciary, professionals and facilitators like us. This will ensure that only those matters worthy of the courts attention and judicial resources will find a place on the docket, while the remaining are dealt with in a systematic, civilized and optimal manner. This way, courts can dispense justice, governments can govern, businesses can flourish, and the citizens can enjoy a stress-free life.

This government has been an enabler and a key contributor to the budding entrepreneurial spirit in India. In fact, Presolv360 is privileged to be recognised by the Ministry of Law and Justice, Government of India, and listed on the website of the Department of Justice. Besides, Presolv360 has also been recognised under the Start Up scheme of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry.

We have seen a lot of discussion in Australia this year regarding artificial intelligence. What have been some of the ‘hot topics’ in India?

Artificial intelligence has become a worldwide phenomenon. ‘Virtual legal assistants’, or legal research tools, a derivative of artificial intelligence, has gained tremendous prominence and is expected to replace some of the legal population. ‘Smart contracts’ is another area garnering attention, while ‘blockchain in contract management’ is picking up momentum too.

What is your ‘legal forecast’ for the next few years?

A shift is imminent, a shift from a curative mindset to a preventive one. This means you will be able to pre-empt problematic relationships, manipulate data to predict toxicity levels and determine a reliable outcome in case a dispute arises. All this at a click of a button. The world will be a fertile ground for pragmatism and a battle ground for opportunism.

If you could give one piece of advice to a law student or early career professional, what would it be?

Unbuckle the seatbelt, step out of your comfort zone, and jump from the airplane – there’ll be troubled weather along the way, but the view and the experience will make it worthwhile!


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Interview | Komal Gupta (Cyril Armachand Mangaldas)

Komal Gupta is the Head of Artifical Intelligence & Innovation at Cyril Armachand Mangaldas in New Delhi, India.  We are very grateful that Milan Gandhi (TLF) had the opportunity to gain insight from Komal with her extensive experience.

Komal, do you have a quote you live your life by or think of often?

Everything happens for a reason – live it, love it and learn from it?

What have you changed your mind about in the last few years? Why?

I have changed my mind about taking risks in life – about taking the path less trodden and moving out of my comfort zone.  I had a great career at Integreon and another LPO job was the obvious way to go.  I instead decided to shake myself up and use my experience in driving innovation at CAM.  Every bit of my previous experience from people and client management, service delivery and business development has helped me understand the firm, its culture and business and I am proud of my unusual decision.  In fact, my decision has now shown an alternate career path to many.

Legal innovation in India

What are three defining characteristics of the legal sector in India vis-à-vis your experience of other jurisdictions?

  • Pricing pressures are more acute
  • Traditionally law firms have not incurred much capex
  • Tech investments are relatively low

Are there unique challenges or opportunities when it comes to innovating legal services in India?

We’ve only begun talking about innovation, technology, processes in India.  It’s a clean slate – one can start from anywhere he likes.  I see many more opportunities than challenges in the journey of innovation – there is an opportunity to educate, to develop, to explore, to experiment, to implement, to be the first one and to be the industry leader. Resistance and discomfort are a given for any change in life but when you have evidence of success – proof of concept – our lawyers slowly start embracing and enjoying the change.  It is a slow journey but I am confident that we will get there sooner than other jurisdictions did.

Are there any myths or misapprehensions about the Indian legal sector that you would correct?

A popular myth is that the Indian legal sector is still Dickensian and old fashioned.  It is already very modern and advanced.  By way of example, I think the Indian legal sector is decades ahead of China.

What does innovation mean to Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas?

Innovation is in our DNA.  The idea of opening a law firm 100 years ago in India was an innovation in itself.  Early campus hiring, professional development trainings to produce the finest lawyers for a just world, adopting latest technology are all signs of innovation since the inception.  Innovation is very dear to our Managing Partner and the entire firm is aligned with his drive to innovate in the practice and business of law.

How did you come to be the head of Artificial Intelligence & Innovation at Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas?

CAM subscribed to Kira in Jan ’17 to use AI in their due diligences to improve efficiencies and accuracy.  My background of a lawyer skilled in people, process and technology was a perfect fit to execute Kira.  While Kira was the starting point, I saw an excellent opportunity to use my skills and experience from my prior jobs in transforming the legal business – in innovating – in becoming a part of the success story of the best law firm in India.  I am now part of broader innovation function of which Kira is just a part.

What does your role entail?

My role is very interesting – there are no boundaries and no set rules. In 2017, I was focussed on getting Kira up and running which I am proud to say I have achieved beyond my own expectations – it has become popular in very less time.  My team has done a great job in training it and now producing live results with accuracy.  While we started off with using Kira for our General Corporate practice only, we now have Capital Markets, Real Estate, Pharma and Financing teams use us regularly.

Currently, I am focusing on exploring new legal technologies, introducing global best practices across the firm, making the practice less people dependent and more process dependent and leading / facilitating various innovation projects.  One of the most exciting project for me this year is the launch of the CAM incubator to help young entrepreneurs develop a useful product for the lawyers and get it right the first time.  During product demos, I have found that the products are developed around the developer’s imagination of what will help a lawyer than the actual know how.   The CAM incubator will support them with the practicalities.  Some more interesting ideas are around using technology in enhancing our evidence management and drafting.

What is the project in the last 12 months that has excited you the most and why?

Training Kira and implementing it has been the most exciting and challenging in the last year.  Training the tool to understand our style of drafting was the toughest task which we slowly accomplished.  Then was the challenge of execution – of selling the tool internally and of teaching the practice teams on how to work seamlessly with the AI & Innovation team which is a process driven team.  We conducted multiple training sessions for the Partners and Associates explaining them how the tool works and in what areas of their practice can they use the technology.  Some brave Partners volunteered to be the first ones and soon the success story spread.  We now have an average of two matters running simultaneously at any given time and repeat clients is a treat we enjoy!

How is Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas taking advantage of artificial intelligence?

We are using AI in due diligence, contract review, legal research and IP.  We believe in efficiencies for ourselves and our clients and wherever we can get assistance from technology, we embrace it in our day to day practice.

The future of lawyering in India

One of The Legal Forecast’s themes this year is ‘the future of law is human’ – do you agree or disagree (and why)?

I think it will be a combination of man and machine which it is even now.  The scope of work for the machine will likely increase.

What is your legal forecast i.e. how will lawyering change in India over the next 10 or so years?

We will have fewer but excellent quality lawyers.  Technology will no longer be an option but a mandate.  Hourly billing will be replaced with transparent fixed cost.  We will move away from paper.  Clients will be driving innovation and pricing.  Work life balance will be far more important for our millennials and we will have flexible working hours, home offices etc. i.e. smarter ways of working.

Do you believe legal innovation has a role to play in advancing access to justice in India, and if so, how?

Absolutely.  Innovation brings efficiencies with smarter tools, processes and resources, accuracy and speed – this will directly reduce the lifecycle of any transaction.    We have been complaining long enough of delayed justice – innovation in how we practice law and smart lawyering will be the solution.

Do you have any tips for early career professionals who may want to follow in your footsteps to secure leadership roles at the coalface of innovation in practice?

Be proud of your decision to take the path less travelled. Studying law does not always mean practicing law – for professionals in the Innovation space, it means empowering the practice and business of law.  Challenges will come in the form of resistance, opposition, how to continually innovate and encourage the innovation culture.  Stay determined and focused on your role and KPIs – success will follow.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

From post-it notes to reality: Race to the Future

Written by Sophie Tversky, TLF Victoria President

On 4 May, The Legal Forecast Victoria held a world first: Race To The Future. It was a metaphorical race, a ‘legal sprint of the mind,’ a 12-hour action-packed day, comprising five challenges taking place around Melbourne CBD. Each challenge reflected a different area of change in the legal industry: client-centred AI, e-discovery, mental health & wellbeing, access to justice, and legal education & careers.

The day began bright and early with a launch at Thomson Reuters – teams were formed, each provided with an Innovation Pack, containing helpful resources and props to guide teams throughout the day…. including lollies to keep their energy levels up! Each team was mentored by representatives of law, technology and professional service firms: Gilbert + Tobin, Janders Dean, Herbert Smith Freehills, Piper Alderman, Allens, Neota Logic, Hive Legal and Law Squared.

The starting line, teams at the start of the day

Teams delved into reforming the legal education system, uncovering ways of improving mental health resources and structural support in the court system, designing an AI-platform to assist a client with environmental approval compliance, proposing technological competency standards, and coming up with solutions to assist access to justice in rural and remote areas.

Teams had the option of completing two further bonus challenges: to rewrite and transform a verbose contractual provision into plain English making it accessible to the general public and building what the future of law would look like, using the resources and utensils in their Innovation Pack.

Teams competing challenges

Teams then further developed one challenge outcome to pitch to judges at a final Presentation Evening & Legal Fair. Teams were assessed throughout the day and on the night on their creativity & design, critical thinking, originality & innovation, collaboration and presentation & engagement.

The Presentation Evening and Legal Fair

We are so grateful to our wonderful final judging panel: Jodie Baker (Founder and CEO of Xakia Technologies, Deputy Chair of ALTA, Co-Chair to College of Law’s Centre for Legal Innovation), Claire Vines (Head of Technology of lexvoco) and Katie Miller (Executive Director of Victoria Legal Aid and author of the report, ‘Disruption, Innovation and Change: The Future of the Legal Profession’). They engaged with teams and interacted with their creations.

Final judging panel: Jodie Baker, Katie Miller and Claire Vines

Katie Miller, Executive Director of Victoria Legal Aid said:

“Fantastic event. I was struck by the number of complex issues woven into the solutions designed by the students. It showed a depth of critical, yet productive, thinking and the strength to be gained by combining that with a playful mindset.”

Our incredible keynote, Jeanette Cheah from The Hacker Exchange inspired everyone in the room, encouraging the audience to continue to be courageous: “your companies and communities in the future need it’ and to “use your social capital, they’ll advocate for you in meetings and they’ll give you feedback.” Jeannette encouraged participants to use this experience as a starting pad, to further develop ideas.

Keynote speaker: Jeanette Cheah

Then… *drumroll* the winners were announced: with Team Fancy Pens (Team Purple), mentored by Piper Alderman, as the winning team. They won the Race to the Future trophy and the team will co-author articles to be published by Thomson Reuters.

Winning Purple Team (Team Fancy Pens)

Team Justice League (Team White), mentored by Gilbert + Tobin, won the Best Performing Team in the Access To Justice Challenge Prize. They received credit vouchers towards a workshop/course at General Assembly.

Winning team of the A2J Prize, White Team (Team Justice League)

Cristabel Gekas received the GlobalX Prize for Innovation, Leadership & Systems Thinking, and was awarded an internship at GlobalX.

Cristabel Gekas receiving her award from COO of GlobalX, David Hobley

The Why

Race To The Future aimed to shake up the Hackathon, focus on innovation as process and bring a sense of play to the legal industry. RTTF sought to celebrate doing things differently, focus on both tech and non-tech solutions and delve into the rationale for choice of mode/mechanism for solving problems. This encouraged critical thinking about problem(s) and resolution(s).

Culture and environment are key to creating spaces that permit ideas (even crazy ones) to thrive. Our approach was that you can pare down a crazy idea but you can’t build one up! We wanted to create a space where “YES AND..” and “WHAT IF?’  were the default mindsets.

The Feedback

“Race To The Future is an awesome way to meet like-minded law students and legal professionals who are all interested in improving the legal industry through innovation and technology. The day was fun, challenging and entirely practical. I wish law school had these days built into the curriculum!”

“Absolutely loved it! Fantastic day, learnt a lot, met a lot of great people, both fellow students and the mentors. Couldn’t recommend the experience more…”

“It was absolutely wonderful. I didn’t know what to expect, but it exceeded any expectation I could have had… I can speak for my entire team in saying we all had an incredible time…”

“Race To The Future is one of the most enriching and innovative playgrounds for law students who aspire to incorporate technology, creativity and innovation in their future careers”

“I loved being part of this event. I was particularly impressed that the event challenged students (and mentors) to not only think about the law and the legal industry in a different way but also provided an opportunity for students gain new skills, like project planning and process mapping. It provided a terrific opportunity to connect with like-minded legal professionals at a variety of different stages of their careers. If this is what the future of law looks like – I am excited.”


Team Green  (Green Lanterns) – Mentored by Janders Dean:

Team Green Lanterns focused on educating youth in rural, remote and regional communities about the legal system and their rights through educational tools such as comic books, online animation, videos and a ‘Law on Wheels’ van.

Team Navy Blue (Deep Blue) – Mentored by Neota Logic:

Team Deep Blue explored changes at law school to prepare lawyers for their future careers and integrating mental health resources into the curriculum. This was to be rolled out to the profession at large by establishing a network of support resources facilitated by technology.

Team Pink – Mentored by Allens:

Team Pink focussed on client-centred AI and used the concept of machine learning to assist clients navigate statutory requirements of environmental protection. Using a decision tree, their prototype could be extended to wider applications – such as building and planning permits.

Team Black- Mentored by Law Squared:

Team Black presented the ‘Montessori Legal Academy’ – a total revamp of the Bachelor of Laws program that integrated technology into the curriculum with the aim of exposing students to a high level of practical assignments and technology.

Team Purple (Team Fancy Pens) – Mentored by Piper Alderman:

Team Fancy Pens developed and proposed standards for legal tech competency and open source standards for legal documents, to be implemented under the Supreme Court Practice Note GEN 5 Technology in Civil Litigation. These standards would support the use of a range of technologies including VR interfacing and beyond.

Team White (Team Justice League) – Mentored by Gilbert + Tobin:

Team White presented their “Court Companion”, an app for first time users of the court system to make the process as non-confronting and comfortable as possible, specifically targeting rural areas.

Team Sky Blue – Mentored by Herbert Smith Freehills:

Team Sky Blue designed an artificial solution platform to assist the construction industry with regulatory compliance and potential legal fees associated with the building process and environmental impact statements.

Team Yellow (Team Buzz Squad) – Mentored by Hive Legal:

Team Yellow focussed on the issue of stigma around mental health in the legal industry and facilitating networks of support for judges, lawyers and clients, including but not limited to compulsory debriefings and post-proceeding support for clients.

Thank you

A big thank you to our major sponsors GlobalX, Thomson Reuters and Dazychain for your generous support and mentorship throughout the day.

Thank you to College of Law and General Assembly for being our wonderful venue sponsors.

Thank you to Thomson Reuters, General Assembly and GlobalX for generously providing students with further opportunities to grow in their professional development through your prizes.

Thank you to the team mentors from Gilbert + Tobin, Janders Dean, Herbert Smith Freehills, Piper Alderman, Allens, Neota Logic, Hive Legal and Law Squared for giving up your day to guide students.

Thank you to the team of volunteers and National TLF board members who came down to be part of this event.

Other media:

Blog post by Lauren Solomonson (Team Black member):

Twitter channel:

Photos (with more to be added):

Interview | Nicole Billett (Teddington Legal)

Nicole Billett is the Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Teddington Legal.  It is Nicole’s desire to develop and lead a diverse network of talented lawyers to provide commercially sound, outcome-focused legal solutions to businesses and their owners.  Nicole’s purpose is to create an environment where entrepreneurial lawyers can provide great value, pragmatic, commercial legal solutions to the small and medium-size enterprise sector.

Michael Bidwell (TLF) was very fortunate to ask Nicole some questions about her amazing career so far!

What do you think are some of the positives and negatives of running a virtual legal practice?

The positives are that the model services both the needs of lawyers and clients.  We have found that lawyers, and particularly younger lawyers, want much more flexibility around how they drive their careers.  They don’t want to be boxed in and be one dimensional, they are multi-faceted and want to be free enough to explore other sides of themselves and what it means to be a lawyer.  I met a fascinating young lawyer who works 3 days a week for a major bank in compliance and then 2 days a week with a manufacturing business as an industrial designer.  How wild is that?  What excited me was because he has this whole other interest and skill set in industrial design, he comes at legal problems with a design thinking mentality.  So rather than splitting his focus, I believe it actually improves his legal abilities and he gets variety and fulfilment in his professional life.

For clients, they are much more sophisticated and informed today and know what parts of the value chain can be automated, outsourced or done more cost effectively and don’t want to pay for highly educated humans to perform tasks they know don’t add value.  By having a virtual practice with a network of lawyers working to their strengths and providing value-added client outcomes, means both sides benefit and personally I love the win win aspect of that.

Hmmmmm negatives…….well the legal industry is still quite conservative and sometimes the idea of utilising technology and pushing the envelope with the style of delivery for legal services, does not sit well with the more traditional members of the fraternity.  And difference or change can be really confronting for some folk who fear and maybe question the future because they can’t see how they fit into the new environment.  I see it as our responsibility to help them understand how they can be part of new law and delivery legal services in the currently business environment.

How did you get into your current position at Teddington Legal and what has really prompted you to stay for nearly six years so far?

I own Teddington with my husband Mark Gardiner who is the Legal Director.  I’m not a lawyer, my career has been in strategy and marketing; together we come at solving legal problems from two different perspectives.  Whilst we have different skills sets we have the same philosophy of being customer centric.  When you put the customer in the centre of the solution you’re providing, you are half way to meeting your goal.  So, you could say I got my position as CEO of who I knew…… but when we decided that we really wanted to grow the business, it seemed logical as I couldn’t give the legal advice, that I would take the CEO position.  Seeing the business grow, developing the clear client proposition and brand and watching our network lawyers thrive, has kept me interested for the past 6 years.

I see on your website that clients can choose the level of involvement with their lawyer up to essentially having their own in-house legal counsel.  How does this work from your end ensuring you have enough staff to advise clients who request lower involvement?

 We’re very responsive to client needs, one of the benefits of the model.  Another benefit of the model is that the network lawyers are not employed, we revenue share, so we can resource up in accordance with client needs.  These clients would not be 100% of any lawyers’ client group so we can balance the workload that way.

You were a Non Executive Director of DV NSW from 2013-2015 advocating for improved responses to domestic and family violence.  I want to firstly thank you for being part of a fantastic organisation and also ask what the most rewarding experience was for you?

 Thank you.  It was quite an honour sitting on the board of DVSM NSW.  What I loved about it was that when the organisation was separating from the Peak Body and was going to focus purely on the service delivery, it went out and sourced corporate women to sit on the board to complement the existing team of professionals navigate a turbulent landscape of funding changes.  This organisation has been run by tireless women committed to creating safe retreats for families suffering with domestic violence.  So to be able to bring my area of experience that I had gained over my career, into a new environment in order to help them achieve their goals was very rewarding.

What is your ‘legal forecast’ for the rest of 2018?  How will the practise of law continue to change?

Law will continue to evolve, more and more lawyers will make the choice to do things differently, less and less will see the only path to satisfaction is that of 100-hour work weeks and a myopic focus of partnership.  I think the Partnership model will continue to come under stress with the requirement to trim costs, outsource repetitive non-value elements, and provide greater value to clients.  Clients will continue to drive towards frictionless relationships with their lawyers.

What advice would you give to graduates and early career professionals?

My advice would be to really challenge why they want a career in law.  If they think it’s for the glamour and see themselves as the next Harvey Spectre or Alicia Florrick, they may need to rethink it.  But if they enjoy problem solving and looking for creative solutions that are actually going to help someone make better decisions then I would recommend they get experience and learn as much as they can about their potential client’s environments.  In our case, we deal with businesses and their owners, so all of our lawyers need to have an interest in business, be interested in what the client is trying to achieve, understand the language and the landscape and be inspired to use their legal skills to add value to the client’s business.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Interview | Dr Emily Verstege

Dr Emily Verstege is an expert at capturing and integrating consumer voice into strategy and governance frameworks. As a (reformed) research academic, tech start up survivor and public policy analyst, she has more than 15 years experience working within the professional and healthcare sectors to put people first.

Michael Bidwell (TLF) saw Emily speak at Convergence 2.0 and was very grateful to ask her some more questions!


When I saw you speak at Convergence 2.0, I really resonated with your comment that technology is changing exponentially but people are not. What does this mean for business?

It means we are suffering from a lack of connection. We are obsessed with and surgically connected to our devices and to a constant stream of content, but studies show Australians are sadder, sicker and lonelier than ever. Rapidly changing technology means we are disconnected from ourselves and from other humans.

The evidence of this is everywhere. Volume is rewarded and value is lost. The professional services sector works with clients who are stressed or vulnerable, and often because we bill by the hour and need to get through a volume of work, we miss clients’ emotional needs. And of course, people in the professional services sector work long hours and, thanks to their devices, are constantly available. It means their personal needs are sacrificed. Again, volume rewarded and value lost.

Your client list is remarkable – who has been your favourite to work with and why?

I am always fired up by working with businesses that understand nothing can stay the same, who are willing to look at what they do and start turning the status quo on its head. I love organisations that invest in people’s experience: their own people, their clients and the broader community. In doing so, their impact is magnified.

I see you have received a Bachelor of Biomedical Science, Bachelor of Science (Hons) and Doctor of Philosophy (Epidemiology). You were then part of the first wholly electronic longitudinal survey in public health research. Please share what these surveys were about and why they were so important.

The studies looked at the health of nurses, midwives and doctors in several countries, including Australia, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and Canada. We know that the Australian healthcare system is in crisis: there is an increasing demand for healthcare, but the way it is funded rewards volume and not value. There is a very real toll on the health and wellbeing of nurses, midwives and doctors, many of whom suffer poor mental or physical health. These two studies collected important health data—which is still being analysed—to inform workforce planning.

You also spent time researching and evaluation projects in the human services sector, including housing and homelessness, health, disability and young people.  I volunteer with the Homeless Persons’ Legal Clinic advocating for the impacts of poverty to be decriminalised.  In your experience, how could the laws and legal industry change to improve the response to homelessness?

Homelessness is a really tricky problem, as you know. It’s often tied up with mental or physical ill health and disability, lack of education or income. In my experience, our human services systems don’t ‘see’ the entirety of a person’s journey into or out of homelessness. Approaches to preventing homelessness tend to be siloed, which makes them one-dimensional and inappropriate for many people. We could do better by connecting data systems, which would require some pragmatic changes to data linkage laws and information systems across government departments.

What advice would you give to anyone reading this?

When we connect with people, we do better. Get into the habit of seeking insights—not just big data, but deep insight from a range of sources—to understand what’s important to people. Integrate those insights into your strategy, business processes and governance. When we deeply understand people we can magnify our impact through exceptional experiences.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Don’t Blake A Smile | Mental health

As the Editor in Chief of The Legal Forecast, I have the pleasure of working with some brilliant authors sharing their ideas and perception of how the legal industry will adapt in the future due to technology and innovation.

I noticed a Facebook page had recently shared the wonderful article by Eloise Dibden.  As I reviewed the posts by “Don’t Blake A Smile“, I immediately felt the pain, loss and confusion in the writer.  I reached out and spoke with Gemma Wilson, the creator of the page.

My motto is for everyone to ‘live out loud’ and Gemma is doing exactly that.  She is sharing her pain and healing in honour of her brother to advocate for a better society – a society that genuinely discusses mental health.

I do not need to remind anyone of the staggering statistics of mental health concerns in the legal industry.  I do want to remind you that you are never alone.  I do want to remind you that you are so valued.  I do want to remind you to “speak, even when your voice shakes”.

If this post causes you any discomfort, or if you would just like to speak to someone, please never hesitate to reach out to:

Gemma’s story is below and you will probably need some tissues.  It is people like Gemma who remind us what true bravery looks like.  It is people like Gemma whose stories will hopefully help others share theirs.  It is people like Gemma who give me hope that our society will continue to embrace those who are open about their mental health.  Gemma, keep fighting the good fight.  I am with you.


Michael Bidwell

Don’t Blake A Smile

June 4th 2017,

The day my eldest brother Blake committed suicide.

Blake was my hero.  I looked up to him so much!  I remember thinking “If I can be more like Blake I’ll be happy.”

He was a carefree tradie by day and an energetic, bubbly shop assistant by night.  Blake had a smile that lit up any room and the ability to make anyone and everyone feel very special.

Those traits explain why there were over 400 broken hearts at his funeral and why so many generous people from our community donated over $22,000 to our family to pay for funeral expenses. Blake was known by everyone around town so I was inundated with messages about how “strong” and “well” I was doing since Blake took his own life.  That was not the case.  I was not doing well.  On the inside I was crumbling.

I would wake up (that is if I had even slept at all) in the morning asking myself all the who’s, what’s, where’s, how’s and the whys which are by far the worst.  Mentally I was not doing well.  It was then that I realised I was doing the same thing as Blake… I was hiding my true emotions from everyone.  I was smiling through the hole in my chest and the weight in my legs, which is why I created the Facebook page “Don’t Blake A Smile.”

I was so ignorant when it came to mental health and suicide before Blake.  It was never taught to me in school and it certainly is not mentioned in general conversation in our society today.  I had heard of suicide and depression but never in my wildest dreams thought that it would affect someone who I adored.  I guess that is the issue, we do not talk about mental health and people suffer in silence.

With an abundance of ways to communicate with someone, it almost seems impossible that you cannot talk about the things that make you unhappy or tell someone that you are struggling.  I cannot stand that there are people who wake up every day feeling the same way that Blake did and face the world with that painful smile.  I was not going to hide my emotions and my opinions anymore because I know it can be so hard to function some days.

I know how hard it is to try to walk when it feels like your knees and ankles are cable tied together.  I know the feeling of that large hole in your chest and golf ball in your throat making it almost unbearable to breathe.  I was done with this public facade.

Mental health is not discriminatory and it certainly is not a one size fits all.  Mental illness is not something you are necessarily born with and you certainly cannot see it but it does not mean it cannot creep up on you or that it isn’t there.

By creating the “Don’t Blake A Smile” page, I want people to realise that they are not alone and that there is help out there for everyone.  I want people to be aware of what makes them unhappy or emotional and speak up, say no and feel good mentally.  I want people to pay more attention to others and if you notice that someone is not happy, offer help or speak up on their behalf.  It’s true.. everyone is fighting their own battles but I read something a while back that always stuck with me, “If we replace the “I” in illness with “we” we get wellness.   #Don’tBlakeASmile

Community Legal Centres Queensland | Conference

From 8-9 March 2018, Community Legal Centres Queensland hosted their annual conference at the Oakwood Hotel & Apartments in Brisbane.  The conference was a fantastic opportunity to meet with a diverse range of people from across the state involved in community legal centres including centre directors and lawyers, social workers, volunteers and decision makers.  There was a wide variety of panel discussions, presentations and workshops relevant to both the community legal sector and the wider legal community.

Laura Spalding and Richard Gifford from TLF represented us well contributing to the conference program.

Key points from the panel included:

  • Importance of private sector getting behind what Community Legal Centres practise so well: un-bundling and legal coaching.
  • Discussed the role TLF events like Disrupting Law play in using technology to solve legal and access to justice problems.
  • Discussed the role the private sector (ie incubators) and crowd-funding initiatives can play in realising access to justice dreams that may otherwise be difficult to finance.
  • Responding to a question regarding the role of AI in the app ‘Divvito’ (one of the panelist Wendy Oxenham’s app on divorce communication): it has in fact used AI to demonstrate empathy; usually an argument mounted by lawyers to justify our relevance, but it’s done better in this case by a chatbot.


Laura and Richard had a brilliant time and we look forward to assisting our Community Legal Centres in future.


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at

Would the real para-legals please stand up? | Disability, mental health & the law

Eloise Dibden is a fourth year law and international development student at University of Adelaide.  She is responsible for assisting the Student Representative Council with hosting its first Student Disabilities Working Group to discuss the issues facing students with disabilities and the ways in which the SRC can support them.  Michael Bidwell, our Editor in Chief, reached out to Eloise to share her story and important message: #thatsokay

Would the real para-legals please stand up?

Disability, mental health & the law

When I was asked to write this article, I was equal parts enthusiasm and nerves. Somehow, even though I feel I am completely out of my depth, I hope to impart to you some insight in to what it may be like to be a young person with a disability, hoping to enter the legal world.  Disclaimer: I have cerebral palsy and have confronted mental health issues… and yes, unfortunately that is a pun in the title.

Being a lawyer (at least so I’ve been told) can be stressful, exhausting and downright hard work.  When you have a disability, all of these things can be amplified… That is of course assuming you have been given the opportunity.  Something that terrifies me as I head closer to the end of my degree, is that employers will never get to witness the skills, knowledge, and quite frankly sassy personality I have developed through my time in law school. Then, even if I am recognised, this does not mean that the work place suddenly becomes a fantastic hive of understanding, respect and support.

However, before any of that happens, I strongly advise you, and remind myself (because goodness knows I need to), to take a breath and look after yourself. I have found myself comparing and judging myself against others. I felt less than people posting on social media about their lives, work and relationships, because I wasn’t up to the same ‘stage’ as them. Then, I realised something: there are no deadlines, or clocks ticking dictating your life. You can set your own pace with your own goals.

Take the time to get to know yourself, your strengths and limitations. These will be different for everyone and that is okay. Knowing yourself and what you can and maybe can’t do is a huge asset. You now know where you shine, and what to work on in the future. You now know when you might need to ask for help: it’s okay to ask for help. That goes for everyone. If you find you need assistance achieving something that’s okay. If you find you can do it alone, that’s okay too. What’s not okay is struggling unnecessarily in silence. What’s not okay are people telling you what you can and can’t do. Say something. The truth is, you need to be your own advocate. This can be a huge task – I have already found it overwhelming during school and university – but it will improve with persistent practice.

One of the biggest hurdles for me to get over (… I should probably say around… I certainly can’t jump over it) was my self-doubt. I believed no one would pick me, or hire me, or think I was worth the effort. I have changed this negative mindset, which has taken me years to really do properly, and now when I see an opportunity I think I may as well give it a go. If I do get selected then I will prove I was worth it. I will ask for the assistance I need. Those who reject me are clearly not the right fit. It’ll take a while, but eventually you may just find your people: your tribe that champions your vibe. Don’t settle for those who ‘overlook’ or dampen your flames.

Although I am speaking on behalf of individuals with disabilities, I can tell you why not creating an open and accepting workplace can be a detriment to all workers: you never know what will happen in the future. I’m not just talking physical difficulties, but also battles with mental health. Instilling a positive organisational culture, and not just on the visible surface, but underneath in the invisible behind-the-scenes day-to-day running, will promote and keep business strong. There are so many ingrained perceptions and assumptions that are still barriers to people gaining the meaningful employment they desire and deserve.

So, I challenge you today. Start a conversation with someone you know, a family member/work colleague/that person you always mean to get around to, but don’t. Ask them, genuinely (I’ll know if it’s not sincere), how they are, and be open and willing to share something of yourself. Too often I have found that by sharing something I have been through, it is only then others are willing to do the same. I know it’s tricky, and could be asking a lot, but if we don’t start communicating, we may never develop the compassion and understanding that is needed for everyone to be their best selves.

You are your own advocate, so take charge of that. Honestly, as corny as it sounds, be the change you want to see.

Start talking, and please let me know if there are any other topics you want me to discuss or experiences you want me to share!

Fingers crossed I’ll see you again,

Eloise Dibden


If you would like to be interviewed or offer your thoughts on a recent event, book or article, please contact our Editor In Chief, Michael Bidwell, at