eHearings & eArbitrations

Job Description: Law In Order wanted to transition its eHearings services onto the cloud


The Challenge

High Stakes Business Need

Law In Order is at the front line of legal technology innovation and aims to provide meaningful change when designing solutions for its clients, addressing real issues that clients are facing.

Supporting trials across all jurisdictions as well as dispute resolutions, royal commissions and commissions of inquiry, Law In Order wanted a cloud service provider that could satisfy four key criteria.

First and foremost, we needed a highly secure PROTECTED environment to host services and data. Secondly, to respond to the fast-paced nature of matters and the varying needs of legal teams, a solution that would enable rapid set-up was important. Thirdly, with the continuity of proceedings being essential, redundancy was a major priority. And finally, to have an understanding of the needs of government, specifically security and confidentiality was also critical.

The Solution

Sovereignty Critical

Law In Order started working with sovereign cloud Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) provider AUCloud,to scope a Roadmap to transition eHearings services over time, into the AUCloud environment. Knowing that AUCloud was wholly Australian owned and operated and that all data, including related account, analytics and metadata was guaranteed to remain onshore, was a key differentiator when it came to market comparisons in the selection of a cloud provider.

A Complete Package Solution

To ensure a complete solution, including capacity for a disaster recovery scenario, Law In Order implemented three core services: Compute-as-a-Service (CaaS), Backup-as-a-Service (BaaS) and Disaster
Recovery-as-a-Service (DRaaS).

With access to the AUCloud PROTECTED environment, IRAP assessed to the PROTECTED level controls of the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) Information Security Manual (ISM), Law In Order immediately satisfied its requirement for eHearings’ applications and data to be hosted in a relevantly credentialled, highly secure environment.

Operating CaaS and BaaS across AUCloud’s geo-resilient environments (from geo-resilient Certified Strategic Data Centres in Canberra and Sydney) meant we also had the redundancy required to ensure business continuity of our eHearing services across all locations.

Any question of AUCloud’s ability to respond rapidly was tested and answered early in the transition process
when we needed to accelerate the migration of business critical eHearing matters to the AUCloud environment.

The Outcome

Security and Business Continuity Assurance

The combination of AUCloud CaaS, BaaS and DRaaS provided us the confidence we needed to operate our eHearing services from anywhere, when required.

Moving to AUCloud has delivered peace of mind that our applications and operational data is secured; is not exposed to either accidental or malicious corruption or deletion; and in the unlikely event of a major disruptive event, is fully recoverable.

Working with AUCloud we know we are supported by a government assessed cloud provider that is also required to continuously monitor and notify any changes in its infrastructure, services or security profile.


Arrow.png Ability to scale up and down rapidly

Arrow.png Cost effective – limitless capability

Arrow.png Confidence that eHearings operational systems and data are protected in a highly secure environment that meets government designated standards

Arrow.png Peace of mind that data is protected against a ransomware and other malicious cyber attacks

Arrow.png Assured restore should there be an attack on operational data

Arrow.png Geo-resilience that delivers mission critical business continuity

Arrow.png Assurance of data recovery and integrity in a disaster recovery scenario


Download the case study

Contact our team

Job Description: We were asked to facilitate an eTrial

Law In Order were approached by the law firms involved in a high profile case to determine whether we could assist facilitating an eTrial. The matter was proposed to be conducted either virtually, hybrid or in-person depending on the circumstances at the time.

The case presented various complexities surrounding the management of confidential evidence and the COVID-19 related travel restrictions imposed on lawyers and witnesses involved in the matter. Lawyers and witnesses required the ability to appear from various Australian state locations and within an Australian Supreme Court that also had restrictions on who could access the hearing so it was determined that a video call would be required for the hearing.

To ensure we could adequately manage the requirements for this matter, considerations were required for the following complexities:

  • COVID-19 Restrictions – managing their impact on any element of service.
  • Videoconference Call – how to manage the various virtual attendees in the virtual hearing with varying levels of confidentiality applied to the evidence, without disrupting the proceeding.
  • Evidence Presentation – how to manage confidential document display in a virtual setting.
  • Evidence Management/Online Court Book – how to manage the confidential documents across the online court book.
  • Webstream – how to manage the principle of open justice with a public webstream of the hearing, while preserving confidentiality of the proceeding when required.   

Our Solution

Virtual/Hybrid Trial

The concern involving travel restrictions imposed on lawyers and witnesses was alleviated by designating a virtual/hybrid trial using videoconferencing platforms, allowing legal teams and witnesses to appear from their firm, chambers or home with the Judge and Associate connecting from the court. The witnesses would appear from either a party’s law firm if convenient or their home. Rigorous testing was conducted with all relevant parties and the court to ensure sufficient stability was available with this approach. Firms connected from New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia with witnesses connecting from across Australia.

Separate Video Conference Links

The complexity surrounding management of the videoconference platform (VC) was resolved by facilitating two separate VC links. One link designated for the video call (Link A) and a second link for the evidence presentation/document display (Link B). By using a separate link for the Evidence (Link B), it enables complete control over who can review the documents, when confidentiality restrictions apply to a particular document displayed on Link B. A virtual participant’s access to this is managed in real-time by the Bridge Manager (the VC Bridge operator who manages the virtual hearing) by transferring the participants not permitted to view that document to a breakout room until the examination concerning that document is complete, then returning those participants to the main room of the VC link.

The VC platforms are managed by a dedicated Bridge Manager, who is responsible for managing the virtual hearing platforms and the integrations of other elements of the service such as Evidence Presentation and Webstreaming. Our experienced Bridge Managers combine their technology expertise with their legal knowledge to provide optimal management of virtual/ hybrid hearings. They provide real-time remote technical support for all online components of a virtual matter and their responsibilities include:

  • virtual lobby admissions
  • monitoring approved attendees to ensure the permitted participants can access the trial while preserving the security of restricted sessions
  • managing break out rooms for legal teams and witnesses as required
  • remote technical support of the VC platform
  • ensuring all core participants are visible and observing participants do not disrupt the hearing
  • maintaining ongoing communication with updates or advice for all participants pursuant to the instructions of the court or the parties.

The bridge manager has complete control over who is permitted for each Link, whether it is regrading the Video Link A or the Evidence Link B. When witnesses are to appear, prior to their appearance they will be kept in a breakout room, they will not be able to enter the virtual hearing or hear any discussion of the matter until the court deems it appropriate that they can join the call. When this instruction is received, the Bridge Manager will transfer the witness into the main call of the hearing. This is the same process conducted when removing participants from legal teams that are not privy to the confidential documents at the time. Participants can be removed from only Link B, if it is permitted that the person still remain in the hearing but can’t see the document Alternatively they can be removed from both Link A and Link B, if hearing discussion of the document is also restricted. We are flexible with our approach and can adapt to shifting requirements as the matter proceeds and instructions change.     

Protocol for the Video Conference Platforms

Third, the complexity of managing confidential document display in a virtual hearing is resolved by adopting a rigorous protocol for the VC platforms and monitoring permissions of virtual attendees, removing participants without permission for different levels of confidentiality. This is supported by strong communication between the Evidence Presentation Operator and Bridge Manager to coordinate these ongoing changes. All documents in the court book include their respective confidentiality level assigned and noted in the metadata of the document. This information is also included in a column of the court book index. That way, when a document is called for display, the Evidence Operator communicates the permission level of that document to the Bridge Manager, who will then move the unpermitted participants for that level of confidentiality to a breakout room, then immediately confirm when this has been actioned to the Evidence Operator before displaying the document for the permitted participants. An approved participant list is kept by all Law In Order personnel engaged in the matter and this document details each participant’s approval to join the hearing and what respective permission they have in terms of accessing the virtual hearing and accessing the display of documents.     

Secure Servers and Confidentiality Agreements

Fourth, the digital court book and related evidence management of confidential documents was conducted in accordance with our standard practice followed in any Law In Order eHearings matter to ensure the data is stored on secure servers and managed by permitted staff. Law In Order and its employees take the security and protection of client data and information seriously and ensure confidential client information and evidence databases pertaining to live/active matters are protected. All staff working on the matter signed confidentiality agreements provided by the parties and only those staff members were permitted to support the operation.

All data related to any eHearings matter is stored on AUCloud servers, which are IRAP certified and the preferred servers of the Australian Government. AUCloud is Australia’s sovereign cloud Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS) provider, exclusively focused on the Australian Government, Defence, Intelligence and Critical National Industry (CNI) communities. All our data is stored on these servers which are Australian owned, managed and operated with all data and services sovereign, resident, monitored and operated in Australia by Australian citizens.

Public Webstream Protocol

Fifth, the public webstream of the hearing is used to support the principle of open justice. Given the nature of confidentiality that sessions may require, we have a rigid protocol the Webcast Operator follows for managing open and closed court sessions, preserving confidentiality of the proceeding when required. Link A is the only link ever used for webstreaming the proceeding where confidential documents are involved. That way no document that is a part of the virtual hearing will ever appear on a webstream. Only the videos and audio of people visible on Link A will be used for a public webcast. We have extensive experience managing confidentiality of sensitive or protected evidence during public or private hearings that are webcast. This includes discussions of substance related to a document that is not seen. We manage this by applying redactions to audio and/or video when content is confidential or protected by Public Interest Immunity, Suppression Orders, Non-Publication Orders or Pseudonym Orders, or switching between open and closed webstream sessions. These changes are applied in real-time and at the instruction of the court or the parties. When the court moved into a section of the examination that dealt with a document covered by a level of confidentiality, we would mute the webcast audio and video with a closed court banner to indicate this. When the session returns to being open to the public, we revert to the open webstream. All these changes are instructed by the court or the parties and applied in real-time. A delay is also applied to the stream, to enable greater control over any redactions that may be realised after they happen although this is limited to a two-minute delay.  

The Outcome

The matter commenced early September 2021 and is ongoing in an Australian Supreme Court Jurisdiction with parties and witnesses connecting to the virtual eTrial from New South Wales, Victoria and Western Australia. All firms are located in states that were restricted to travel and the virtual format of this trial has been suitable for all involved. All witnesses have been managed successfully and no one has been disadvantaged by virtual appearances. The management of the confidential documents for Evidence Presentation and the Digital Court Book has been conducted efficiently with the court’s expectations and the parties’ specific requirements. The matter has been conducted successfully and there have been no breaches of security.

Download our case study

Contact our team

Job Description: We were asked to transition the hearing format for a Royal Commission


The Challenge

We were asked to transition the hearing format for Royal Commission into Violence, Abuse, Neglect and Exploitation of People with Disability (DRC) into a virtual/ hybrid environment to allow hearings to continue through COVID-19.

Each state and jurisdiction have different rules and COVID-19 related restrictions in place that can change significantly at any time. The necessity to transform the previous project plan for the DRC required a considerable transformation of most of the eHearings service offerings. Prior to COVID-19, the DRC had conducted numerous public hearings remotely while the Permanent Hearing room in Brisbane was still in development. The remote hearings included Townsville, Melbourne, Brisbane and Sydney. The DRC concluded that the earlier approach was inadequate for operating during COVID-19. Consequently, significant technological transformation was required to accommodate the new requirements.

Our Solution

We implemented various new strategies and solutions to accommodate the requirements for hybrid/virtual hearings, involving:

  • Building a new permanent hybrid hearing room in Sydney for the Chair and other commissioners or counsel assisting as required.
  • Developing the virtual hearing services in the Brisbane Hearings Room to accommodate the new hearing, with updates to existing infrastructure where required.
  • Our expertise in videoconferencing technologies and cloud-based evidence solutions, and other webbased solutions was fundamental to employing new methodologies.
  • Implementing hybrid innovations with virtual solutions to amalgamate our ‘in-person’ components with the virtual elements, to facilitate an integrated offering that would suit the evolving technology requirements imposed by COVID-19.
  • Technical Support dedicated to Commissioners with a disability, to ensure safety and ease of participation from isolated locations.
  • Update of our accessibility innovations designed for the DRC hearings to integrate with the virtual/ hybrid hearings format. This includes captioning on the webstream, Auslan interpreters from various locations, dedicated Law In Order staff for isolated commissioners and witnesses to ensure optimal participation of isolated participants, among others.
  • Novel remote and virtual innovations were implemented into our webstreaming workflow, to allow for video sources from various locations.

The Outcome

Hearings continued through COVID-19 in a variety of modes including public hybrid hearings, purely virtual hearings and remote hybrid public hearings. Since the inception of the virtual/hybrid transformation of the DRC, several hearings have been delivered, continuing the progress of the DRC. The DRC used the Sydney and Brisbane Hearings Rooms with virtual attendees for the majority of the hearings, as well as some purely virtual private hearings and two remote hybrid public hearings in Adelaide and Homebush.

The hearings ensured all accessibility innovations that were available to the public during the in-person hearings were preserved in the virtual/hybrid format. Maintaining ease of access and optimal participation for people with a disability, and optimal accessibility for viewers with a disability of the webstream broadcast.

The hearings have been successfully managed in this new environment and the DRC has continued despite the impact of COVID-19 and the various restrictions imposed.

Download the Case Study

Contact our team

Job Description: Running of The Royal Commission into Natural Disaster Arrangements in a virtual format


The Challenge

Due to COVID-19, we were asked to run the hearings for The Royal Commission into National Natural Disaster Arrangements (RCNDA) in a hybrid/virtual format.

Initially, the RCNDA was to be conducted with in-person hearings in Canberra and remotely around Australia. Due to the COVID-19 restrictions in the early phases, the project plan needed to change quickly in order to be able to conduct hearings before the final report was due. This meant we had to re-evaluate and redesign the way we would deliver our Royal Commission eHearing services. We needed to ensure the hearing related services would be operational and deliverable during COVID-19 with its evolving requirements. The hearing related services changed from ‘in-person’ to a virtual and hybrid hearing room environment, utilising virtual hearing services for witnesses and leave to appear parties.

Our Solution

We built a hybrid hearing room at the Attorney General’s Department’s office in Canberra, designed specifically for the purpose of conducting RCNDA hybrid hearings. This comprised of:

  • A hybrid hearing room that could incorporate any portion of physical and virtual hearing room components. We remained cognisant that the greater the virtual and physical requirements, the greater the complexities. We navigated these challenges with our innovative and bespoke technological solutions.
  • We designed fresh hybrid solutions to substitute for the traditional ‘in-person’ elements, incorporating our expertise in video-conferencing technologies and cloud-based evidence services. These hybrid technologies seamlessly amalgamated with existing ‘in-person’ technologies allowing core participants to be present in a hearing room using the ‘in-person’ components with the integrated virtual components.
  • The implementation of a COVID-19 business plan along with strategies to mitigate the impact of COVID-19 restrictions on the delivery of our service.
  • Coordinating our fit-out of the core hearing room infrastructure to ensure all attendees could interact and contribute during the hearing with optimal quality, without breaching social distancing and capacity measures.
  • We facilitated Remote Real-time Transcription, using a remote stenographer to join the virtual hearing via the VC platform and transcribe from their remote location This reduced the quantity of legal support personnel, allowing for more RCNDA staff.
  • Implementation of agile and adaptable solutions that could transition from in-person to virtual if required, improving the dynamism and flexibility of our webstreaming service, evidence presentation service, evidence management workflow, realtime transcription, virtual appearances from counsel, external legal teams, witnesses and experts.
  • All witnesses appeared virtually and were displayed on screens throughout the hybrid hearing room alongside evidence screens – the new format.

The Outcome

The RCNDA conducted all the required hearings within one year, with minimal delay or disruption throughout the proceedings, all during COVID-19 restrictions. The hybrid hearing room services and virtual operations were delivered with a high standard and optimal quality. There were a few hearings when one of the commissioners was unable to attend the hybrid hearing room in-person and we successfully coordinated their virtual appearance, allowing them to observe witness examination and to ask questions from their home.

The new format of hearing related services was facilitated successfully in the hybrid environment. All elements of a hearing room were available to all personnel either ‘in-person’ or virtually, depending on their location. All elements were executed with high quality and were received positively by the client.

Download the case study

Contact our team

Job Description: Last minute request for eTrial - Time Frame: 48 hours


The Challenge

Law In Order received a call at 5:00 pm on a Friday with an urgent request for quotation for a court ordered eTrial involving the provision of evidence display solution to be managed by Counsel. There were two parties, 5 barristers and 5 lawyers. Law In Order had already worked with the plaintiff to provide an eCourtbook. The trial was schedule to commence on Monday.

The Solution

Law In Order responded with a quotation within 10 minutes of the request and received the go ahead from the client to proceed by 5:40 pm.

The Outcome

Law In Order worked through the weekend to ensure all the logistics were secured and set up the eTrial ready for proceedings to begin the following Monday at 10 am.

Job Description: We were to provide real-time transcription screens in a state dispute international arbitration


The Challenge

The challenge was to provide real-time transcription screens, in addition to evidence presentation screens, to be used by arbitrators and senior counsel in a state dispute international arbitration.

Our client had many documents in evidence with multiple versions and different language translations. When cross examining witnesses, interpretation services would be essential.

As interpretation itself can be in dispute, navigating easily and quickly in the transcript would be important for time efficiency and precision.

The arbitration had time limits, so precision and productivity were a high priority to ensure time utilisation was maximised.

The Solution

The real-time transcription solution enabled scrolling to earlier sections. This allowed users to navigate to sections in question, clarify hard to understand accents, follow interpretation, and annotate and copy portions of text instantaneously. Users could then easily return to the current scrolling text.

The system also maximised desk-space. Using low-profile monitor arms and touch screens removed the need for a keyboard and mouse, allowing room for documents and bundles. Configured to client specifications, with the evidence screen on one side and a touch-screen with real-time on the other, positioning the monitor arms on the table edge gave a clear view of the Tribunal, witnesses and counsel.

Language barriers were addressed by interpretation integrated into the live transcript.


  • 24-inch touch screen monitors to run the live transcription.
  • Interpretation booths for interpreters.
  • Channel 1 – English channel.
  • Channel 2 & 3 – non-English channels.

The interpretation worked alongside the evidence presentation, integrating into the audio system and the non-English to English interpretation was provided to the stenographer for the transcription.

The touch screens were positioned to facilitate the counsel, judge or arbitrator’s operation to enable maximum efficiency, accuracy and speed.


  • Easily incorporated into any eArbitration where real-time transcription is running through LEXEL, with the added benefit of multiple features.
  • The system is easy to navigate using hyperlinks and side by side mode.
  • Ideally the system should be mounted so users can stand without leaning.
  • Low barrier to entry as everyone understands touch functionality.
  • Low cost – hire of touch HD monitor and laptop to facilitate touch function.

The Outcome

We received positive feedback from the client and all parties associated with the matter expressed their satisfaction with the solution’s functionality.

Your Project

For complex international arbitration matters, integrating interpretation is an effective feature.

Within the time constraints of a Chess-Clock Arbitration, expediating legal processes is paramount. This innovation is essential to further streamline the operation.

If you are interested in understanding how our services might benefit you and your team, please do not hesitate to contact us for an obligation free discussion.

Download the case study


Job Description: Our client received a tranche of disclosure from another party totaling around 55,000 documents.


The Challenge

Our client received a tranche of disclosure from another party totaling around 55,000 documents. Their aim was to review all 55,000 documents, but to prioritise the review to find documents similar in nature to their own key documents first.

The Solution

Relativity has various tools to identify similar documents.  Documents can be grouped by near textual duplicates, clustered by concepts or fed into a Technology Assisted Review (TAR) workflow.

In this matter where the client wanted to review all documents, but prioritise the order of review, the best solution was to deploy Relativity’s active learning workflow.

Active learning learns from decisions made on documents as they are coded in the review workflow. It uses these decisions to continuously deliver documents to a review queue based on what the software believes to be the next most similar document to those already coded as relevant.

As the review progresses, the review queue is continually updated based on the decisions being made.

In this matter we were able to take the documents that the client had already identified as key documents in their own disclosure and use these as a pre-coded set to train the system and kick start the active learning review queue.

The Outcome

The active learning project showed its value from the start.

Using only a very small seed set of around 260 key documents, the project returned a mean relevance rate of 45% for the first 2,000 documents. By the second 2,000 documents, the mean relevance rate had fallen to 24% and by the third set of 2,000 documents the mean rate had fallen to just 12%. In overall terms, the mean relevance rate fell from an initial peak of 63% (for the first 200 documents) to 6.8% by the end of the project, with the last 20,000 documents having a mean rate of just 1.54%.

The below graph illustrates how using active learning enabled the review team to review the most relevant documents sooner.


Contact our team

Download the full case study

eDiscovery & Document Review

Job Description: Review of 88GB of email data for an internal investigation - Time Frame: 14 days


The Challenge

A State Government (Department) requested that we assist them with the review of 88GB of email data for the purpose of an internal investigation. The internal investigation needed to be conducted quickly and accurately for a report that would inform the Department’s response to a Right to Information request.

The number of the documents (747k) required to be reviewed made the traditional approach of printing and reviewing the material in hard copy, within the limited time frame, not a viable option. Further, the internal tools at the Department’s disposal did not have the forensic capability to undertake the interrogation of the documents required in this instance.

As a result, the Department sought guidance from our expert review workflow team as to how best to overcome this challenge.

The Solution


1. Process the documents

a. Our technical team would remove all the duplicate documents within the data and make all remaining documents, where applicable, text searchable;

b. Develop effective and accurate key-word searches and apply them to the de-duplicated data. Responsive documents to be given a unique document reference number before upload to the review platform.

2. Review of responsive documents in an online database

a. Database design and setup to suit the Department’s review outcomes including providing training to the review team on navigating the responsive documents;

b. The Department’s team would use Analytics (email thread and near-duplicate detection), along with further key-word searches to review and “tag/code” documents relevant to their issues.

3. Produce a list of “relevant” documents

a. We would produce a hyperlinked list of relevant documents before closing the database and an export file provided to the review team should future review be required; and

b. Hold a post project review meeting to discuss


The Outcome

Our expert review team worked closely with the Department to reduce their reviewable set of potentially relevant documents from 747,000 to 6,500 documents in 48 hours. The responsive documents were uploaded the next day with training provided to the team who, with the assistance of our experts, completed a review of those remaining documents in less than 10 days.

Once the review was complete, our experts undertook various quality assurance processes and provided the Department’s review team with an exported hyperlinked list of documents within 24 hours.

In total, the review of the documents was completed in less than 14 working days saving the Department a significant amount of time and money.

Download the full case study

Contact the team


Job Description: Our client was representing a large financial institution who was obliged to respond to s.33 notice - Time Frame: 2 Days


The Challenge

Our client was representing a large financial institution (the Bank) who was obliged to respond to a s.33 notice issued under the ASIC Act (the Notice).

The Notice required the Bank to produce various documentation relating to its handling, during an eighteen‑month period, of several default events in relation to corporate loan facilities held by the borrower. There was only one week remaining to respond to the Notice and assessment of relevance to specific questions in the Notice was required as well as determination of privilege and privilege basis.

Our client was told by the Bank it had, by selecting a wide date range to be certain to capture all relevant materials, identified a data set of approximately 30GB of unprocessed data. The Bank initially estimated this set comprised “approximately 10,000 – 15,000 emails” requiring review. This number did not include attachments.

The lack of certainty regarding the exact number of documents made it difficult for our client to determine appropriate resourcing or even know whether the review could be completed in the limited time available.

The Solution(s)

1. Provide Proposal Options for Consideration

We were able to provide our client with various options for resourcing the first level review (FLR) depending on the various (and wide range of) possibilities of the exact number of documents within the data set. These proposals meant our client could be confident, regardless of the number of documents, we could deliver the documents to them in a timely manner.

2. Allocating and Training a Sizeable Review Team

Our team has in-depth experience in responding to regulatory notices from a number of bodies so was able to commence the training of a team of over 50 reviewers on the particular subject matter of the transaction. The team was tested on the training and was able to develop a strong understanding of the subject matter in a short period of time.

This also meant the team was ready to commence FLR immediately upon the documents becoming available.

3. Flexible Working Arrangements

The Review Team was able to commence work on a Saturday and continue during a weekend to meet the
client’s deadlines.

4. Prioritising Custodians

After processing, the data set was found to contain approximately 80,000 documents, comprising 38,000 emails and 42,000 attachments – from around 25 custodians (mailbox holders).

We were able to work with our client to proceed with the review prioritising documents based upon which particular custodians our client believed were more likely to be central to the investigation.

Three categories of Priority were created. This then permitted FLR, QA and release of those documents to the client for second level review (SLR) in that order, minimising downtime for the SLR team and enabling them to commence reviewing highly relevant documents more quickly.



By utilising our processing resources in Australia and offshore, and extended weekend shifts for our offshore Review Team, the process from receipt of the unprocessed data through to release to our client of the coded data was completed in just 4 days. This was from receipt of data late on a Thursday to completion by Monday afternoon.

The MDR review team itself completed the assessment of all 80,000 documents for responsiveness to the Notice and relevant documents for privilege within just two days.

This gave our client sufficient time within which it could conduct its SLR and ultimately enabled the Bank to meet the tight deadline imposed upon it in the ASIC notice.


We were able to effectively manage our client’s review project despite an initially uncertain number of documents within an extremely tight timeframe.

Download the full case study

Contact the team


Job Description: Our client was required to produce documents for the Banking Royal Commission in a tight timeframe - Time Frame: Less than 3 days


The Challenge

Our client, a professional association working in the financial services space, was required to produce documents for the Royal Commission into Misconduct in the Banking, Superannuation and Financial Services Industry (the Commission). The Commission’s request was issued mid-December with response submissions and supporting documents required by the end of January  2018. This short six-week period included the Christmas and New Year shutdown period, which posed  additional resourcing issues for the client. Failure to comply with the request from the Commission would result in custodial and financial sanctions.

During this brief period, the client was required to:

  1. Identify and collect relevant documents;
  2. Review all the relevant documents; and
  3. Prepare detailed written submissions following consideration of those documents by their legal team further shortening the review window available.



1. Process the documents

  • Our technical team would remove all the duplicate documents within the data and make all remaining documents, where applicable, text searchable; and
  • Develop effective and accurate key-word searches, and apply them to the de-duplicated data. Responsive documents would be given a unique document reference number before being uploaded to the review platform.

2. Review of responsive documents in an online database.

  • Database designed and setup to suit our client’s review outcomes including providing training to the review team on navigating the responsive documents;
  • Our client’s team would use Analytics (email thread and near-duplicate detection), along with further key-word searches to review and “tag/code” documents relevant to their issues.

3. Produce a list of "relevant" documents

  • We would produce a hyperlinked list of relevant documents before closing the database. An export file would be provided to the review team should future review be required; and
  • A post project review would be held.



Our expert review team worked closely with our client to reduce their reviewable set of potentially relevant documents from 21,000 to 2,000 documents.

The responsive documents were uploaded the next day with training provided to the team who, with the assistance of our experts, completed a review of those remaining documents in less than the estimated 72
hours. This included the ingestion and review of additional documents which were provided during the review.

Once the review was complete, our experts undertook various quality assurance processes and provided our client’s review team with an exported hyperlinked list of documents within 24 hours.

In total, the review of the documents was completed in less than 3 days saving our client a significant amount of time and money.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: Our client, representing the trustee of a large trust, was required to disclose documents....


The Challenge

Our client, representing the trustee of a large trust, was required to disclose documents pertaining to a share value transaction dispute.

Following the application of keyword searches, approximately 37,000 documents had to be reviewed within a short period of time, with the court ordered disclosure date fast approaching. The client had minimal resources with only two lawyers on the matter. While the client had originally approached Law In Order only for eDiscovery services, our Consulting team suggested that the Managed Document Review team could assist to accurately review these documents in time for the disclosure deadline.


1. Set up the Review Platform
Our eDiscovery team processed the data and de-duplicated documents to create a smaller set. Then they uploaded the documents onto our Relativity review platform and applied keyword searches to further reduce the data set to assist the legal team.

2. Review the Relevant Documents on an Online Database
Using the disclosure categories required in the proceedings, we developed tags on the review platform for the Review Team to code against. The Managed Document Review team then underwent a Project Briefing and training on the matter from the Review Briefing Note prepared by the client, which gave them background on the matter as well as greater insight into the review categories. The Review Team was then able to review the material, coding for general relevance and privilege as well as responsiveness to the individual categories.


The Managed Document Review team completed First Pass Review of the material in two weeks, allowing the client time to complete their own Second Level Review to meet their disclosure deadline. Without our Managed Document Review services, the client most likely would have had to hire additional staff and train them within a short period of time to complete the task. The database we provided was searchable and made it simpler for the client to access the key documents for the case. The client stated that Law In Order “made light work of a pretty tricky discovery for us”.

Your Project

The large volume of time and resources necessary to ensure accurate document review can put at risk both the quality and speed of your client’s outcomes, when working without the right support. Let our expert review team provide you with the resources you need for a tight turnaround.

If you are interested in understanding how our services might benefit you and your team, please do not hesitate to contact us for an obligation free discussion.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: Our client was representing a large infrastructure company in proceedings with their lead contractor


The Challenge

Our client was representing a large infrastructure company in proceedings with their lead contractor regarding disputed payments of variation and extension of time claims, among other issues. Like many construction projects, the volume of documents was significant. In addition, the ten disclosure categories were very complex, many turning on the circumstances of individual disputed events. Following application of keyword searches and other measures to reduce the overall document set, an initial set of 105,000 documents was identified for review.

The biggest obstacle to meeting the disclosure deadline was the review and identification of relevance to the disclosure categories and their subcategories (one category having over 35 subcategories). The client had initially proposed that the documents should be reviewed by each category, which would require the documents to be potentially reviewed ten times for each of the categories it was responsive to. We devised a workflow to create two groups of categories and thereby review the documents only a maximum of two times. The experience and training of the review team allowed them to consider half of the categories at one time while reviewing one document. This not only saved the client money but also allowed us to predict the project duration and resulting cost.


1. Workflow
We developed and implemented a plan to limit review of each document to a maximum of two times by allocating the categories to groups and the review operated as followed:

This enabled the Review Team to narrow their focus to each group of categories as was relevant and in turn, enabled faster and more accurate review of the documents and a speedier completion of the review.

2. Review
Using the disclosure categories required in the proceedings, we developed tags on the review platform for the Review Team to code against. The Managed Document Review team then underwent a Project Briefing and training on the matter from the Review Briefing Note prepared by the client, which gave them background on the matter as well as greater insight into the review categories. The Review Team was then able to review the material, coding for general relevance and privilege as well as responsiveness to the individual categories.


The workflow plan, tailor made for the client’s project, was vital to ensure all documents could be tagged accurately within the deadline. The customised review allowed the documents to be reviewed both diligently and efficiently. Due to thorough and extensive Review Briefings, the Review Team was able to gain understanding of the facts and circumstances of the matter and the review categories in a short period of time. Following this initial phase, the client engaged Law In Order to review additional tranches of documents in the next phases of their review project.

Your Project

The large volume of time and resources necessary to ensure accurate document review can put at risk both the quality and speed of your client’s outcomes, when working without the right support. Let our expert review team provide you with the resources you need for a tight turnaround.

If you are interested in understanding how our services might benefit you and your team, please do not hesitate to contact us for an obligation free discussion.

Download the full case study

Contact the team


Job Description: Novice eDiscovery users required to assess 40GB Lotus Notes Files - Time Frame: 1 week


The Challenge

Our client with no eDiscovery experience had to assess 40GB worth of Lotus Notes e-mail files. They wanted a quick, low cost option to access the information on hand in order to evaluate the scope of the issues and determine their approach.

The Solution

We ran the files through Venio which gave lawyers access to the data within hours. As the client needed to ascertain how connected the e-mails were in relation to the matter – they wanted a clear picture of the parties involved, our Solutions Consultants ran keyword searches and showed the social network map that visually shows who this person sent emails to which proved to be a great tool to the legal team.

The Outcome

The use of Venio allowed for the legal team to complete scoping in 2 days and the Discovery completed within 7 days. The job was delivered earlier than expected and under budget.

Contact the team

Job Description: Regulator request for information, unknown data size & scope - Time Frame: 10 days


The Challenge

Our client was tasked to meet a regulator request for information within a 10 day period. The initial data size was not known, nor was the content or discovery scope. Ultimately we received 400GB of email and free files from the file server.

The Solution

We ran the raw data into Venio and within 24 hours the lawyers were able to look at the first 100 GB batch of information first thing in the morning. We then sat down with the partner and the senior associates of the matter and were able to refine Keywords/Date Range/Custodians elements of the data very very quickly – ultimately there were 150 custodians and 450 individual items.

The Outcome

Project was delivered within the time frame.

Contact the team

Job Description: Fast discovery deadline - Time Frame: 3 days


The Challenge

Our client had 1.2TB of data they needed to assess to determine the scope of discovery.

The Solution

We received 1.2TB of data on three hard drives.

The Outcome

The data was ingested and indexed into Venio FPR within 3 days, allowing the lawyers to view, search and analyse the documents to accurately determine the best course forward in the matter.

Contact the team

Digital Processing

Job Description: Manual Indexing


Our Legal Process Outsourcing (LPO) team is made up of electronic document management professionals who specialise in our clients’ everyday paralegal tasks. Our specialists allow our clients to meet their requirements cheaper and faster than using conventional paralegals, so clients can work on more complex tasks.

The Challenge

Our client, a Government Agency, needed assistance with preparing an index in Word using their template. The client had one PDF consisting of approximately 2,200 pages with a number of documents within the PDF. The task was to identify the beginning and end of each document and enter the required information for each document into the Word index.  

Some of the challenges we faced:

  • It was a manual task which involved identifying the beginning and end of each document, extracting the required information for each document and entering the information into the client provided Word template.
  • The task would take a very long time to complete if only one person was to work their way through the 2,200 pages.

The Solution

Our specialists implemented the following solution.

  • The PDF was split into four sections. Each split was at the beginning and end of a document.
  • Each section was assigned to a different person.
  • Our Tracker was used to manage and track the progress of each section.
  • The four sections were combined into one PDF once the work on the sections was completed and Quality Assured.

The Outcome

The job was delivered on time and the Government Agency continues to use our services on an ongoing basis.

Your Project

Let our LPO team of specialists manage all your electronic paralegal tasks, so you can focus on your core tasks. Our LPO team is fully trained and experienced with the latest document processing tools in order to deliver the most efficient and cost-effective results for our clients.

Download case study

Contact the team

Royal Commission Services

Job Description: Our client required a team that could manage all support aspects of a Royal Commission


The Challenge

The client, a specially formed arm of a Federal Government agency, required a team that could manage all support aspects of a Royal Commission. The client required a suite of solutions including document processing and management, electronic hearing room services, eDiscovery services and public webcasting, whilst maintaining a presence onsite, in the context of its existing environment with minimal disruption to the current proceedings. Furthermore, there was a requirement to service several remote locations throughout Australia. The existing infrastructure was customised which required highly skilled technical staff to be dedicated to the project.

The Royal Commission itself had a high public interest component as well as delicate sensitivities and confidentiality requirements in relation to witnesses and documentation. The Commission needed a provider attuned to this process and who could offer security cleared staff.

The client also required a tight turnaround for these services to ensure the continuation of public hearings in early January in a remote location, limiting the implementation period to one month over the Christmas and New Year holiday period. We needed to coordinate a security cleared project team as well as project managing a tight implementation plan within this short timeframe.

The Solution

1. Transition Services

Within one month of the agreement between the Royal Commission and Law In Order being executed, our project teams were installed onsite. The teams undertook the following:

a. Reviewed existing workflows, practices and technologies, to establish efficiencies and cost savings across all services;

b. Formalised Risk Management and Change management plans;

c. Implemented agreed workflow recommendations and process improvements;

d. Implemented agreed changes and updated and developed SOP’s and project control documentation; and

e. Continued “business as usual” in both Sydney and remote locations.

2. Document Management Services

Our team worked with registry managing the evidence handed up by the parties with leave to appear. Additional document processing was conducted off-site on behalf of the case study teams working under the Office of the Solicitor Assisting. There were 57 Case Studies and 5 dedicated case study teams who required photocopy, print, scan and objective coding services from our secure sites around Australia. Communication procedures and secure transfer protocols were established to enable document management services between the Royal Commission and our premises.

3. Hearing Related Services

The transition between our service offerings enabled the case study teams and external legal representatives to work with the technology and our staff efficiently. Hearing Services included a full court-room set up and testing of two onsite hearing rooms, operating public webcasting of hearings, commissioning and decommissioning fully equipped electronic hearing rooms in remote locations, assisting with tender bundle preparation and service, managing exhibits and transcripts, and presenting evidence during hearings. Law In Order provided solutions to the Royal Commission for up to 55 witnesses per week appearing in person or remotely.

The Outcome

One of the key outcomes for this project was the seamless integration of the our team into the existing Royal Commission structure. This allowed us to provide solutions quickly and effectively across multiple Royal Commission teams and create smooth work flow.

The client was able to utilise the implemented workflows and the working relationship that we fostered with the internal legal teams, to improve on document processing times. They were able to access documents for review significantly faster compared to the previous workflow.

The client was able to utilise our national team, either onsite at the Royal Commission or at our premises to assist with all aspects of the project, including 24/7 assistance.

The hearing services provided by Law In Order not only allowed the client to proceed with its busy hearings schedule without delay, but saw significant time savings resulting from an improved evidence presentation solution seamlessly integrated into the hearing room. The improved webcasting component delivered a better feed quality together with the ability for the client to monitor community viewing and engagement levels.

The client was also able to access decommissioning and archiving documentation of the review platform, enabling them to efficiently hand over documentation to the future custodian of the Royal Commission for the purposes of historical records.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: High Volume, Quick Turnaround for Royal Commission Response

The Challenge

We were asked to partner with a number of government agencies (‘Agencies’) who were asked to appear before a Royal Commission. The Agencies were required to submit information in compliance to a Notice to Produce. We received approximately 150 boxes from various organisations.

The Solution

We offered our clients a three step solution:

1. Digitisation
Digitisation transforms information into computer-readable format. Our recommendation for this process was document scanning to an image for more efficient storage, security and organisation.

Benefits of digitisation:

  • Prevents degradation and aging of documents
  • Searching for documents is faster
  • Frees up physical space
  • Enhances security
  • Particularly useful for over-size documents
  • Documents are more accessible on a number of devices
  • Cuts overheads
  • Increases productivity by improving communication, collaboration and automation

Although the process was slowed down by de-stapling, unclipping and removing post-it notes, we turned the 150 boxes around quickly.

2. Delimiting

The next stage involved delimiting 250,000 pages of scanned material, adding page numbering and optical
character recognition (OCR).

We bundled the scanned documents by subject matter electronically. The main benefits are minimising the time spent searching for a file and creating a user-friendly database of files.

After delimiting, we used OCR technology to electronically convert the documents from an image into encoded,
searchable text and added page numbering.

3. Objective Coding

The final stage was to objectively code the documents following the format stipulated in the document management protocol provided by the Royal Commission.

The objective coding stage involved our expert Legal Process Outsourcing team reviewing each document and preparing a computerised index of basic objective data for each document, e.g. document date, author, recipient, document type, etc.

Objective coding corrects any inaccurate metadata attached to the document, e.g. a document written and signed by a partner might show the administrative assistant as the author in the metadata, because it was originally typed on the assistant’s computer.

The Outcome

The information required for The Notice to Produce was submitted on time and complied with the protocol.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Document Production

Job Description: Australian Federal Government Agency had 12 boxes of materials to be scanned

The Challenge

An Australian Federal Government Agency (‘Agency’) required specialist handling of sensitive evidence. The
Agency had approximately 12 boxes of materials which needed scanning. The material was hand delivered directly to the secure room in our Melbourne office.

The Solution

We have experience in handling white glove material and understand the sensitive nature of this evidence. Law In Order dedicated a project team to the task to ensure security and confidentiality.

After the materials were delivered, the Operations Manager, who oversaw the job, worked with staff from the Agency to sort through each box and packet of evidence.

The exact materials were checked and signed off by our project team to ensure everything was accounted for and then the materials remained in our secure room until they were required for scanning.

When a box was required for scanning, it was collected and taken to our production floor. Only project team members were permitted to handle the material and all team members wore white gloves during the scanning and QA process.

The documents were scanned using Optical Character Recognition (OCR) to produce editable and searchable
electronic files. The files were then delimited, a process that determines the start and end of documents, and categorises electronic documents by either client name or subject to minimise file searching and create a database of files that is easily searchable.

Our team also used objective coding to capture metadata from the documents (e.g. document date, author, recipient, document type, etc). This metadata could then be uploaded into any review platform to increase the documents’ searchability, making document review more time and cost efficient.

Once this process was completed, the Agency staff returned to our office to collect the hard copy materials and the electronic material on USB. All evidence was checked and signed off, then re-secured and taped up.

Your Project

We have undergone rigorous security reviews. Our security extends to a range of areas including personnel clearance, premises, procedures, protocols, transportation of evidence, storage and information technology. All Law In Order offices have installed reliable and up to date security systems. We have also been evaluated and rated by ASIC.

Our team can scan documents of any size up to A0, processing high volume with fast turnaround. As well as providing delimitation, OCR and coding services, we can also deliver a hyperlinked index according to your

Should you have documentation that requires special treatment, please do not hesitate to contact Law In Order
for an obligation free discussion.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: 115,500 pages - Time Frame: Under 24 hours

The Challenge

Our clients, a government entity and a mid-tier law firm, required 11 copies of a 10,500 page court book;the equivalent of 94 large, A4 lever arch folders. We received the documents in the afternoon and it was required by midday the next day, so our Document Management team had less than 24 hours to complete the job. It was a particularly difficult deadline as it fell on a Friday as the clients needed to review the printed copies for trial the following week.

The Solution

The clients greatly assisted us in meeting the deadline by contacting us several days before to let us know a very large, bulk print job would be coming through.

This allowed us to:

  • Stock up on paper, folders and dividers ahead of time
  • Manage other clients’ jobs that were coming in, allowing us to clear as much work as possible in anticipation of the bulk job
  • Adjust our team’s roster ahead of time

Our team worked late and came in early to ensure the job got out on time.


There were no issues with the print job. For our clients, the whole exercise was seamless and they were both very happy with our team for completing and delivering the job on time. The lead up to the trial was very well supported by our Document Management team.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: 23,000 documents reviewed and printed - Cost Savings: $28,000 - Time Frame: 2 days


The Challenge

A client requested an estimate of fees associated with the production of a chronological ordered, hard copy version of the email data that had been provided to them by their client. The client needed to review the material and provide a hyperlinked list of the most relevant documents to their barrister.

We essentially broke down the required work into three simple steps:

Task 1 – Produce the email data.

Task 2 – Review the email data in the manner in which it had been produced.

Task 3 – Provide a refined list of relevant documents, along with the documents themselves, with a supporting index for review by their Counsel.

The Solution

Workflow Options

Following our initial consultation with our client we identified three separate workflow options to complete the Production tasks identified, which also had varying degrees of benefit in terms of the Legal Review. Those workflow options were:

1. Internal Hardcopy (Time = 8 Weeks*)

Our client could print the email data using their available internal resources, manually converting each of the 23,000 documents to printable format. Review all 60,000 pages and select which of those will form part of the brief to Counsel. Once the relevant documents have been identified an index could be dictated, transcribed and a manual hyperlinking process completed using internal resources.

2. Outsourced Hardcopy (Time = 1 week*)

Our client could engage us to de-duplicate the data, print in chronological order and provide a technically extracted index of all emails from which the relevant documents can be identified. Once the relevant documents have been identified they can be hyperlinked in a semi-automatic manner.

3. Outsourced Electronic (Time = 2 Days*)

Our client could engage us to de-duplicate the data and upload to an electronic review platform. Using the platform, and its data analytics (like email threading), they could identify the relevant documents and have a hyperlinked index of those relevant documents exported automatically, or allow Counsel access to the platform through their own secure login.

* excluding review

The Comparison

Set out below is a comparison of the fees/costs for each of the three tasks, using each of the three workflows identified previously.


Please note that the relevant workings for Production and Review figures can be provided on request.


The Outcome

In this instance our client opted for the Outsourced Electronic workflow as it presented the best immediate value for them and their end-client because of the following benefits:

  • they could begin reviewing documents almost immediately;
  • duplicate documents could be removed;
  • email conversations could be organised and “threaded”;
  • the review platform gave short, and long-term efficiencies in respect of the review; and
  • some of the fees could be passed directly to their client.

The client also opted to have a copy of the final relevant set of documents produced by our team as it represented a saving to them as compared to the cost (both tangible and intangible) of using their internal resources.

Download the full case study

Contact the team

Job Description: 50 Folders x 10 copies - Time Frame: 1 day


Law In Order received the job at 5pm, due the next morning. Documents required pagination, copied 10 times and delivered to the other parties at 4 different CBD locations. Documents contained staples, clips and dividers. All folders were placed in boxes with clear labels specifying box number, copy set and volume range with recipient details. Job was completed by the due time of 9:00 am.

Job Description: Overnight Work - Time Frame: 5-8 hours


Over a period of 3 weeks, 2 firms that were engaged in Federal Court Fast Track Litigation proceeded to service documents to opposing parties at Midnight. Law In Order would be required to pick up documents from between Midnight and 3:00 am from various locations in the CBD; copy and then deliver the finished product to various locations by 8:00 am.

Job Description: 27 folders x 20 copies - Time Frame: 15 hours


Our client logged an urgent copying job at 6:00 pm which required an overnight turnaround. Law In Order picked up the documents, continuously paginated 27 folders, prepared over 200 custom dividers, placed in folders with folder covers and spines. The job was delivered back to the client at 8:30 am.

 Can't find the resource you need?

Get in contact with the Law In Order team or call us on 1300 004 667.

Get in Touch