This workflow pattern has been designed to manage the process of a solicitor (or in-house lawyer) formally engaging counsel/a barrister to advise or represent a client. It is intended to be a common process that can be used on a variety of matter types.

Context/Background

The general user journey and process is as follows:

• The user determines that specialist advocacy, an independent opinion, or court representation is required
• They consider the complexity of the matter, the seniority of counsel needed (junior barrister vs King's/Queen's Counsel), and any budget constraints
• Select a suitable counsel, often through:
  • Their firm's existing relationships with chambers
  • Recommendations from colleagues
  • Legal directories (Chambers & Partners, Legal 500)
• Define what they are being instructed for, for example to draft or prepare a brief or other document such as a defence, or to attend a hearing
• Instructions are often sent to the barrister via their chambers clerk
• Counsel reviews the instruction and information provided and may come back with requests for further information or documents
• Counsel will confirm if they accept the instruction, if they are not available/suitable, the user will start the process again and instruct a different counsel
• For significant matters, the solicitor may arrange a conference — a meeting at chambers or remotely — where counsel, the solicitor, and often the client discuss the case
• As the matter progresses, the user may send supplemental instructions updating counsel on developments and/or provide a bundle for counsel
• Counsel delivers the work/attends the hearing 

Workflow Implementation

The workflow is intended to be run manually as and when needed; likely via a menu option on the matter portal, which may need to have a display rule applied to ensure only appropriate teams/personas can initiate the workflow.

The high level steps of the workflow are:

• Create a task for the user to select the counsel as a participant and the reason for instruction
• On receipt of a response from counsel the workflow will route appropriately based the response
  • If further information is needed or instruction from the client is required the user can generate correspondence to get this
  • If the instruction is not accepted the user can re-start the process and select a different counsel to instruct
  • If the instruction is accepted, the user can chose to prepare a brief/more detailed instructions for counsel, produce a bundle and/or record the counsel fee

Considerations when implementing this workflow pattern:

• The manage participants CTA could be refined to create a specific participant role (role usage/naming may vary for different clients) rather than open the manage participants blade
• Additional reasons for instruction may be required, in which case the routing should be updated
• In this workflow pattern the ‘Record Counsel Fee’ CTA opens a general costs & disbs budget - the appropriate budget type should be updated if budgets are being used
• Some clients may have agreements with their clients to use preferred counsel - the mandate could be used to capture preferred suppliers and the counsel selection process updated as appropriate