Media

Advocate makes his point

The Australian Financial Review 1 June 2007
By Marcus Priest

Advocacy in Australia needs to fundamentally change and barristers to learn to get to the point more quickly to reflect the push by courts to shorten trial times and reduce the complexity of modern litigation, one of the founders of advocacy training says.

Chairman of the Australian Advocacy Institute George Hampel, QC, told The Australian Financial Review that the training of advocacy was now responding to likely future law reform requiring swifter resolution of litigation.

Three weeks ago, the Federal Court announced that it would create a new "rocket docket" system to fast-track litigation, while the Victorian Law Reform Commission has indicated it is looking at new rules for civil litigation to make justice "swifter, cheaper and fairer".

And this weekend, South Australian chief justice John Doyle is also likely to add his voice to the need for a shake-up of civil litigation in a speech entitled "Dispute resolution: Is civil litigation part of the solution or part of the problem?".

Professor Hampel said that as a result of these likely changes, advocacy training was increasingly teaching barristers and solicitors the importance of the early identification of issues and the need for a greater focus on key points in court. "More and more we are getting away from the older style of advocacy where every issue was canvassed, every point taken," he said. "Training of advocates will have to keep up with what courts expect from advocates through a greater emphasis on focus and efficiency of presentation.

"In 15 years, a judge will not allow an unfocused approach and everyone will have to commit themselves to an approach which is limited to specific issues." Professor Hampel was one of the originators of modern advocacy training, which has become a key part of barristers' reading courses in many states and also in the United Kingdom. This year, the Australian Bar Association established an advocacy course for barristers in smaller states due to concerns there was no facility for advocacy training at the smaller bars.

"How this all started was that I and a few other people realised that the idea that you were born to be an advocate was a nonsense," Professor Hampel said. "Experience hides a lack of skill. Give me a good advocate as distinct from an experienced one."

Professor Hampel said he expected that in coming years, it would become a breach of ethical duties for lawyers to engage in delaying tactics. "When I was a young barrister, a judge would sit back and take what comes and now a judge will ask 'What is your best point?' "Over the next few years, I expect it is going to accelerate because of the various pressures and demands for more efficient and focused litigation."

We gratefully acknowledge the permission from Marcus Priest at The Australian Financial Review to reprint this article.