Commercial Litigation in 2026: Why the First 90 Days Decide Everything
Commercial litigation in Australia is becoming increasingly front-loaded, with courts placing greater emphasis on early evidence preservation, tighter pleadings and faster case management. Businesses delaying preparation can find themselves at a strategic disadvantage before proceedings have properly begun.
The first 90 days of a dispute now carry far more weight than they once did. Early decisions around evidence, pleadings, internal investigations and strategy often shape the direction, cost and timing of the entire matter.
Litigation Is Becoming More Front-Loaded
Australian courts are placing increasing pressure on parties to identify the real issues in dispute early and move matters forward efficiently. Strict procedural timetables, early disclosure obligations and active judicial case management mean businesses can no longer afford to take a reactive approach once proceedings commence.
The opening stages of litigation are no longer simply procedural groundwork. They often determine how much leverage a party has throughout the life of the dispute.
Poor preparation at the outset can create problems that become expensive and difficult to fix later. Delays in securing evidence, inconsistent internal communications or poorly framed pleadings can weaken a party’s position before the substantive issues are even argued.
Early Evidence Preservation Matters
In most commercial disputes, documents are central. Emails, contracts, internal messaging platforms, meeting records, financial data and digital audit trails frequently become key evidence.
The difficulty is that electronic material can disappear quickly. Devices are replaced, staff leave businesses, files are overwritten and records are deleted as part of ordinary business operations. Once litigation is anticipated, failing to preserve relevant material can create significant evidentiary issues.
Businesses that act early are generally in a much stronger position. Preserving records, identifying key custodians and conducting early document reviews can reduce uncertainty and prevent disputes about missing or incomplete evidence later in the proceeding.
Metadata and digital records are also becoming increasingly important, particularly where the authenticity or timing of documents is challenged.
Pleadings Are More Important Than Ever
Commercial pleadings are becoming increasingly strategic. Courts expect parties to properly articulate their claims and defences at an early stage, rather than refining them gradually over time.
A well-prepared pleading does more than outline allegations. It frames the dispute, influences disclosure obligations, shapes interlocutory applications and can affect settlement discussions from the outset.
By contrast, vague or poorly prepared pleadings can expose weaknesses, increase legal costs and damage credibility with both the court and the opposing party.
For businesses involved in significant disputes, investing time in early case analysis can materially affect how the litigation progresses.
Faster Case Management Is Changing Litigation Strategy
Commercial courts across Australia continue to focus on efficiency and proportionality. Judges are showing less tolerance for unnecessary delay, excessive document disputes and procedural tactics that do little to advance the real issues.
This has changed the practical reality of litigation. Parties are often required to make important strategic decisions much earlier than they previously would have. Decisions about evidence preservation, expert engagement, interlocutory applications and settlement positioning may need to occur within weeks of proceedings commencing.
Businesses that are unprepared can quickly find themselves reacting to deadlines and procedural pressure instead of controlling the direction of the matter.
The First 90 Days Often Shape Commercial Leverage
Most commercial disputes still resolve before trial, but the strength of a party’s negotiating position is often established very early.
Strong evidence, organised preparation and clearly articulated claims can place significant pressure on the opposing party from the beginning. On the other hand, evidentiary gaps, inconsistent positions or delays in responding can weaken leverage and increase costs.
The early stages of litigation also influence timing and commercial outcomes. Narrowing issues early, preserving key evidence and identifying realistic objectives can create opportunities for efficient resolution before costs escalate further.
Businesses Should Prepare Before Litigation Escalates
One of the most common issues in commercial disputes is delay in seeking advice. By the time legal assistance is obtained, businesses may already have lost access to key records, compromised internal communications or missed opportunities to protect their position.
Commercial disputes should be treated in the same way businesses approach regulatory or cyber risk - preparation before a crisis develops is critical.
Practical steps include:
- maintaining reliable document retention systems
- implementing internal escalation processes for disputes
- preserving communications once litigation is anticipated
- identifying key decision-makers early
- seeking legal advice before responding under commercial pressure
These steps can significantly reduce risk and place businesses in a stronger position if proceedings become unavoidable.
Courts Are Continuing to Push Efficiency
Australian courts have repeatedly emphasised the importance of efficient case management and early identification of issues in commercial proceedings. The Federal Court’s Central Practice Note last year reflects the broader shift towards proportionality, efficient conduct and reducing unnecessary delay in litigation.
This broader procedural trend is continuing to influence how commercial disputes are managed across Australia.
Preparation Can Shape the Entire Dispute
Commercial litigation in 2026 is faster, more document-heavy and more strategically demanding than it was only a few years ago. Businesses that delay preparation may find themselves losing valuable leverage before the dispute has properly developed.
Early evidence preservation, careful pleadings and a clear litigation strategy can significantly affect cost, timing and commercial outcomes.
If your business is facing a potential dispute, early advice can help protect your position and avoid unnecessary risk later in the process. Contact us to discuss how we can help you protect your position from the very beginning.
JCL Law Partners Receives Recognition from Best Lawyers and Best Law Firms - Australia 2027
JCL Law Partners is pleased to announce its inclusion in the 2027 edition of Best Law Firms - Australia, recognising the firm’s expertise across its core practice areas. The firm is ranked as Tier 1 for Insolvency and Reorganisation Law in Brisbane.
The Best Law Firms rankings are based on extensive research, including feedback from clients, peer reviews, and interviews with legal professionals, reflecting a strong reputation for quality and professionalism within the industry.
In addition to the firm’s recognition, Founder and Director James Conomos has again been recognised in the 2027 edition of The Best Lawyers in Australia for his expertise in Insolvency and Reorganisation Law in Brisbane.
This dual recognition highlights both the strength of the firm as a whole and the depth of experience within our leadership. JCL Law Partners continues to focus on delivering practical, results-driven legal advice across commercial litigation, insolvency, and restructuring matters.
The firm acknowledges this recognition as a reflection of our ongoing commitment to client service, technical expertise, and achieving effective outcomes.
JCL Law Partners Director Adrian Robins Heads to Vancouver for IR Global ‘On the Road’ Conference
Very soon, JCL Law Partners Director Adrian Robins will attend IR Global’s next ‘On the Road’ Conference in Vancouver, taking place from 9th - 13th June at the Pan Pacific Waterfront.
The conference will bring together professionals from across the globe, providing a valuable opportunity to connect with fellow members of the IR Global network and strengthen relationships across key international jurisdictions.
The program features a full schedule of panel discussions, breakout sessions, and networking events, all designed to encourage collaboration, knowledge-sharing, and practical insights across a range of practice areas.
For JCL Law Partners, maintaining a strong global network is essential. Attending events such as this allows us to stay connected with trusted advisors worldwide, ensuring we can continue to support our clients with cross-border matters and international opportunities.
Adrian looks forward to engaging with colleagues in Vancouver and continuing to build meaningful connections within the IR Global network.
JCL Law Partners adds Adam Carr as a Rising Star to the IR Global Network
JCL Law Partners is pleased to share that Senior Associate Adam Carr has joined IR Global as a Rising Star.
The Rising Star category recognises emerging professionals within member firms who are actively involved in building relationships across the network and contributing to international collaboration.
IR Global is a leading multi-disciplinary professional services network, connecting advisors worldwide to support clients on cross-border matters. Adam’s inclusion reflects his growing involvement in the firm’s international work and his commitment to engaging with the global professional community.
He joins JCL Law Partners’ existing IR Global members, including Founder and Managing Director James Conomos, Director Adrian Robins, and Practice Manager Justine Fletcher.
We look forward to Adam’s continued contribution to both the firm and the IR Global network.
AI Evidence Is Coming to Court: Authenticity, Manipulation, and Proof
Artificial intelligence is no longer just a business tool. It is increasingly part of the evidentiary landscape, and it is beginning to affect how disputes are run and how digital material is assessed in litigation. Emails drafted with AI assistance, AI-generated reports, deepfake-style audio or video, altered voice recordings and synthetic documents are now realistic possibilities in commercial disputes.
Australian courts are now confronting a practical question: can digital evidence still be trusted in the same way it once was?
For businesses, this is not an abstract concern. Many disputes turn on what was said in an email, what was agreed in a message thread, or what was captured in a recording. If those materials are challenged as manipulated or fabricated, the dispute can quickly shift away from the underlying commercial issue and into a technical contest about authenticity and proof. Understanding how courts approach authenticity is becoming critical.
The Rise of Synthetic Content
AI tools can now generate convincing text, images, audio and video in seconds. Many of these tools are used legitimately and responsibly in everyday business operations. However, the same technology can also be used to fabricate documents, mimic voices, alter recordings or create realistic but false digital material.
The issue is not simply that this can be done, but that it can be done cheaply and without specialist expertise. A fabricated email chain can be made to look genuine. A recording can be edited to alter meaning without obvious signs of tampering. A document can be subtly amended before it is produced in proceedings. These are no longer remote or hypothetical scenarios.
In commercial litigation, where digital documents often form the backbone of a claim or defence, this creates a new layer of risk.
Authenticity and Proof in Australian Courts
The rules of evidence have not fundamentally changed. Whether proceedings are governed by the Uniform Evidence Acts (including the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) and equivalent State legislation) or Queensland’s Evidence Act 1977 (Qld), parties must still establish that the material they rely upon is what it purports to be and can be treated as reliable.
Historically, authenticity disputes have often been resolved through relatively straightforward evidence about authorship, storage and alteration. In many cases, the reliability of a document was assumed unless there was a clear basis to doubt it.
AI alters that landscape. Manipulation may not leave obvious traces. AI-generated content can appear coherent, professional and entirely plausible, even if it is false. This does not mean courts will accept AI-affected material without scrutiny. If anything, it increases the importance of demonstrating the provenance and integrity of digital records.
Metadata, audit trails, server logs and, in some cases, forensic expert evidence are likely to become increasingly significant.
The Burden of Proof Has Not Changed
Even as technology evolves, the legal principles remain steady. The party relying on a document or recording continues to bear the burden of proving authenticity and relevance. What is changing is the complexity of proving it.
A dispute that once focused squarely on commercial facts may instead become dominated by questions about document history, file creation, access permissions, version control and whether AI tools were used to generate or modify the material. That shift can add cost, delay and uncertainty to proceedings, even where the evidence ultimately proves genuine.
For businesses involved in high-value disputes, strong document governance and secure record-keeping are becoming strategic safeguards.
Deepfakes and Altered Recordings
One of the most concerning developments is the rise of deepfake audio and video. In commercial disputes, recordings of meetings, negotiations or phone calls can be decisive. If a party alleges that a recording has been altered or synthetically generated, the evidentiary dispute may become as significant as the underlying commercial claim.
Even where allegations are unfounded, the widespread availability of AI tools makes authenticity easier to challenge. This can delay proceedings, complicate settlement discussions and require additional expense for technical analysis or expert reports.
Courts are alert to these risks, and challenges to electronic recordings are likely to become more frequent as the technology evolves.
Courts Are Already Responding
Australian courts have begun addressing AI-related risks directly, particularly in relation to litigation documents and submissions. In September 2025, the Supreme Court of Queensland issued Practice Direction No. 5 of 2025, acknowledging the increasing use of artificial intelligence in litigation while warning that generative AI tools may produce apparently plausible but inaccurate or fictitious material. The Court emphasised that responsibility for accuracy and integrity remains with the party and their legal representatives.
The message is clear: AI may be used as a tool, but it does not dilute professional and evidentiary obligations.
What Businesses Should Be Doing Now
The most effective response to authenticity challenges is preparation. Businesses should not wait for litigation to consider whether their digital records would withstand close scrutiny.
Robust document management systems, secure storage practices and disciplined version control are increasingly important. Preserving metadata and maintaining clear audit trails can be critical if authenticity is questioned.
Internal awareness also matters. Staff should understand that AI tools can introduce risk, particularly in sensitive communications, contract drafting or internal reporting. Clear policies about when AI may be used and how that use is documented can significantly strengthen a business’s position if evidence is challenged.
These measures do not eliminate risk, but they enhance credibility - and credibility often shapes outcomes.
AI as Evidence in Its Own Right
In some disputes, AI systems themselves may become the subject of evidence. A claim may turn on how an algorithm reached a decision, whether it relied on flawed data, or whether an automated process operated as intended.
In those cases, transparency and documentation become critical. Businesses deploying AI tools in operational or decision-making contexts should be able to explain how those systems function, what data they rely upon and what safeguards are in place. Without that clarity, defending a claim may become considerably more difficult.
Early Legal Strategy Matters
Disputes involving digital evidence and allegations of manipulation are rarely straightforward. They often require early strategic decisions about preservation of records, forensic investigation and expert engagement. Acting too late can result in loss of metadata, incomplete audit trails or an inability to clearly explain how evidence was created and stored.
Early advice and timely evidence preservation can shape the direction and sometimes the outcome of a dispute.
A New Evidentiary Landscape
AI is not replacing the legal system, but it is reshaping how evidence is created, challenged and proved. As synthetic content becomes more sophisticated and accessible, authenticity is likely to become a more frequent battleground in commercial litigation.
Strong governance, secure systems and proactive planning are increasingly essential. Where the authenticity of digital evidence is questioned, preparation may determine whether a business can prove its case, defend its position or resolve the dispute efficiently.
If your organisation is navigating a dispute involving digital material, or is seeking to strengthen its internal safeguards before one arises, careful legal planning now may avoid far greater difficulty later.
As the evidentiary landscape continues to evolve, preparation matters. If you would like to strengthen your internal safeguards or seek advice on a current dispute, our team is here to assist. Contact us to start protecting your position with confidence.
JCL Law Partners to Sponsor IR Global’s ‘On the Road’ Conference Dinner in Singapore
Next month, James Conomos (Managing Director) and Justine Fletcher (Practice Manager) will be attending IR Global’s latest ‘On the Road’ Conference in Singapore. JCL Law Partners will have the pleasure of sponsoring the event’s luxury networking dinner at the idyllic Artemis Grill.
Jim will be connecting with professionals from a wide range of jurisdictions across the Asia-Pacific region, providing a valuable opportunity to engage with peers from around the world.
The program offers a strong mix of learning and networking, with presentations, breakout sessions, and social events hosted in premium venues throughout one of Asia’s most vibrant cities.
In today’s increasingly connected landscape, a strong international network is essential. By attending events like this, we continue to strengthen our global relationships and enhance the breadth of support we can offer our clients.
James Conomos Heads to Berlin for IR Global’s Annual Conference
This September, JCL Law Partners’ Managing Director, James Conomos, will swap Brisbane’s winter skies for Berlin’s late-summer energy as he attends another IR Global Annual Conference.
For Jim, these events do more than just tick the networking box. They’re about conversations that lead to real solutions, collaborations that cross borders, and perspectives that challenge the way we approach complex legal issues. With 400+ global professionals coming together, there’s no shortage of opportunities to share experiences and spark new ideas.
This year’s theme - Legacy in Motion - resonates strongly with our approach to practice. We believe a lawyer’s role isn’t just to resolve matters today, but to create strategies that will stand the test of time. Whether it’s advising on intricate cross-border disputes or helping clients navigate evolving regulatory frameworks, lasting value comes from combining local expertise with a global outlook.
Outside the conference sessions, Berlin’s history, architecture, and vibrant culture will set the stage for informal discussions and genuine connections - the kind of interactions that often lead to the best collaborations.
JCL Law Partners’ regular attendance to these conferences reflects our commitment to keeping our perspective fresh, informed, and globally connected. This means that our clients will continue to benefit from advice shaped not only by legal knowledge, but by the shared wisdom of a worldwide network.
If you’ll be in Berlin during the conference and would like to connect with Jim, we’d be delighted to hear from you - please get in touch at jim@jcl.com.au
Jim looks forward to seeing you there!
Smart tech, safe hands
- How can businesses in your jurisdiction adopt AI and automation responsibly, and what guidance are you offering to ensure regulatory compliance?
In Australia, responsible adoption of AI starts with understanding that these technologies must operate within existing legal frameworks. While there isn’t yet a comprehensive AI-specific statute, businesses are still bound by key legislation such as the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), the Australian Consumer Law, and anti-discrimination laws.
Any business introducing AI or automation should begin by identifying the specific functions the technology will perform and the type of data it will handle. There’s a clear need to ensure human oversight, particularly where decisions have legal, financial or reputational consequences for individuals.
Although voluntary, the Australian Government’s AI Ethics Principles offer a useful reference point. These cover areas such as fairness, transparency, privacy and accountability, and can be helpful in shaping internal governance.
There are also practical measures businesses can take. For example, being transparent with customers or clients about when AI is used in decision-making processes can help manage expectations and build trust. Clear documentation, staff training, and regular audits of AI systems further support responsible implementation.
In terms of compliance, the key is not simply ticking boxes but embedding thoughtful oversight into how AI is integrated into day-to-day operations. That may mean slower adoption, but it significantly reduces the likelihood of legal issues down the line.
2. What are the key risks of implementing AI, from data privacy to ethical concerns, and how can you help businesses in your jurisdiction navigate these complexities?
The risks associated with AI are varied and complex, particularly when it comes to data handling and ethical impacts. In many cases, AI systems require access to large datasets which often include personal or sensitive information. Misuse or poor management of that data can result in serious breaches of privacy law.
Bias is another major concern. If the data used to train an AI system reflects historical inequities, the system may replicate or even amplify those patterns. This can result in discriminatory outcomes in areas like hiring, credit assessments, or access to services. Even when the bias isn’t intentional, the legal consequences can be significant.
There are also broader ethical challenges. If an AI tool is being used to make high-stakes decisions (such as assessing job applications or determining eligibility for financial support), there needs to be transparency around how those decisions are made, and mechanisms for people to challenge them if needed.
From a legal standpoint, businesses should be conducting risk assessments before implementing AI, particularly in areas that directly affect individuals. Data protection impact assessments, internal policy reviews, and regular oversight of AI performance can help mitigate these risks.
Importantly, reliance on AI doesn’t remove legal responsibility. Businesses remain accountable for the outcomes their systems produce, and failing to monitor these systems adequately can leave them open to claims of negligence, discrimination, or breach of privacy.
3. Are you seeing any trends in AI-driven disputes or liability concerns? How can firms assist clients in addressing potential AI-related litigation or regulatory scrutiny?
While Australia hasn’t yet seen a flood of AI-related litigation, early signs suggest disputes are beginning to emerge, particularly where AI systems have made incorrect or unfair decisions. These disputes often raise difficult questions around liability, especially when the decision-making process lacks transparency.
One challenge is attribution. If an AI system denies someone access to credit or employment, and that denial was based on flawed data or a biased algorithm, who is responsible? The business deploying the technology? The vendor who developed it? At present, the law doesn’t provide definitive answers in every scenario, but what’s clear is that organisations deploying AI remain ultimately responsible for its use.
Another emerging issue is the use of AI in content generation and data scraping. There are ongoing debates about whether training AI on publicly available but copyrighted content constitutes an infringement. Until courts or legislators provide clearer guidance, this area remains uncertain and potentially risky for businesses relying on third-party AI models.
In this evolving legal landscape, businesses can take some practical steps. Reviewing and updating contracts - especially those involving AI tools or data processors - can help clarify responsibilities and manage risk. It’s also worth considering whether current insurance policies cover AI-related incidents, including reputational damage, data breaches, or system errors.
Overall, the trend is towards increased scrutiny. As regulators, courts and the public become more familiar with AI, expectations around transparency and accountability are likely to grow. Businesses using these technologies will need to stay alert to changing standards, and ensure they have the right processes in place to respond.
Key Takeaways
- Australian businesses introducing AI should align their practices with existing legislation such as the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth), consumer protection laws, and anti-discrimination provisions. Voluntary AI Ethics Principles offer a governance framework, but businesses must embed transparency, oversight, and audit practices into day-to-day operations to ensure responsible implementation.
- AI systems that rely on biased data risk producing discriminatory outcomes, even unintentionally. Transparency in automated decisions, particularly those affecting employment, finance or services, is critical. Legal obligations persist regardless of whether the decision-making was automated or human-led.
- Although case law is still emerging, liability concerns are increasing in areas such as unfair automated decisions, data scraping, and AI-generated content. Businesses must review contractual arrangements with technology providers, assess insurance coverage, and prepare for increased regulatory scrutiny.
This is James Conomos‘ submission to IR Global‘s latest edition of ‘The Visionaries’. Read the full publication here.
JCL Law Partners Director Adrian Robins and Practice Manager Justine Fletcher Visit New Orleans for IR Global ‘On the Road’ Conference
Last week, Adrian Robins (Director) and Justine Fletcher (Practice Manager) of JCL Law Partners attended IR Global’s ‘On the Road’ Conference in the vibrant city of New Orleans.
The event brought together professionals from a wide range of jurisdictions, offering a valuable opportunity to connect with like-minded individuals from across the globe, particularly those operating within the US.
Throughout the week, attendees participated in a packed agenda that included panel discussions, breakout sessions, and a variety of networking opportunities in some of New Orleans’ most iconic venues. From the opening drinks reception to the luxury networking dinner and cultural walking tour, the event combined professional growth with meaningful connection in a uniquely atmospheric setting. Justine also co-hosted a session on new AML Laws with the network’s practice management committee.
Maintaining a strong global network is essential, and attending these events allows us to continue expanding our international presence, strengthening our capabilities, and delivering enhanced value to our clients.
We are grateful to IR Global and the sponsors for hosting such a memorable and well-organised event, and we look forward to continuing our engagement with the network in the months and years to come.
Justine and Adrian also sat down with the IR Global team to discuss the firm's history and how we are leveraging digital marketing to expand our offerings to our clients:
Why Adrian Robins thinks learning never stops – even at the top (IR Global June 2025 Member Spotlight)
JCL Law Partners Director, Adrian Robins, featured as one of the IR Global network's June member spotlights. Read the full piece below:
Adrian Robins, a Director at Brisbane-based JCL Law Partners, has built a career defined by calm amidst conflict. He balances leadership, strategy, and deep legal expertise to support clients through high-stakes commercial litigation.
“I’m responsible for managing the practice, supervising staff, and overseeing the legal work alongside Jim (Conomos),” he says. “But at its core, my role is about resolving disputes and helping people find clarity in difficult circumstances.”
With over 17 years at the firm and 20 in legal practice, Adrian has seen the firm evolve – and personally, he’s held nearly every title going. “I started here as a solicitor, moved through associate, senior associate, salaried partner, and eventually director,” he explains.
The road from Sydney to Brisbane (and into litigation and insolvency)
Adrian’s career in law began in a niche area as a legal costs consultant. “That was just something I did after I’d finished university, in part because I didn’t know what I wanted to do,” he laughs.
The role gave him broad exposure to many areas of legal practice and insight into how firms operate behind the scenes. It also helped him quickly identify the practice areas he was most drawn to: commercial litigation and insolvency: “It was the sort of work that interested me the most and was most suited to my personality and skill set.”
Originally from Sydney, Adrian relocated to Brisbane through a short-term opportunity with a former firm. “It was meant to be just a bit of an adventure,” he says. “I very quickly found that Brisbane was a lot easier and a lot cheaper to live in than Sydney.”
What was supposed to be a one-year secondment turned into a long-term career and a life built in Queensland at what was then known as James Conomos Lawyers.
“Even when I was in my twenties, 17 years at a firm was exceptional. It wasn’t the norm. It just happened, I’ve enjoyed working here and with the people I’ve worked with.”
No two days alike
As a commercial litigator, Adrian is drawn to the variety and intellectual challenge of his work. “The beauty of commercial litigation is there’s no typical workday,” he says, “the litigation is the mechanics of what you do, but the subject matter varies markedly between matters.”
His role as a Director also includes supervising legal staff, managing client relationships, and overseeing strategic decisions at the firm. “There’s more responsibility for the day-to-day management of the practice,” he explains. “More of a strategic focus, I suppose.”
Despite holding a senior leadership role, Adrian continues to remain closely involved in legal matters. “I think everybody finds this, but when things get busy, you revert to type – you just knuckle down and get it done,” he explains.
In addition to court appearances, he frequently spends time advising clients, preparing for mediations, and managing complex disputes. “It could well be a whole day of conferring with clients and client meetings,” he says. “It could be a day in court or in mediation.”
However, court appearances are less frequent than many people assume: “You don’t spend as much time in court as people think. A lot of the work is preparing for court; putting your clients in the best position for when the time comes.”
Adrian’s day-to-day work also includes mentoring junior staff and ensuring the firm remains efficient and client-focused. “Not being the person doing as much of the grunt work, but trying to delegate and lead,” he adds. “It can be hard, though, particularly when the team is busy, because you often have to jump back in and do the work yourself, just to keep things moving.”
Finding purpose in people, not just the courtroom
Though he’s had his share of court victories, Adrian finds the greatest satisfaction in helping clients find peace during stressful times.
“As a litigator, one of the most satisfying things is when you have a matter that goes all the way through to trial… and you get a written judgment. It completely vindicates your client’s position.”
But often, it’s the more intangible moments that matter most. “Sometimes you can actually visibly see when you’ve put a client at ease. When they come in, they’re worried, they’re stressed…if you resolve a proceeding at mediation… sometimes you can even see the relief on your client’s opponent’s face.”
Overcoming imposter syndrome and industry pressure
Adrian is open about the challenges he’s faced, particularly early in his career. “I had a sense that I struggled to be taken seriously by more senior practitioners,” he shares.
“I suspect that was probably more a function of some kind of imposter syndrome.”
Back then, it wasn’t uncommon for senior lawyers to ignore junior correspondence and only respond to partners. “You don’t know whether that’s just because they were in a hurry… or whether it was a deliberate thing.”
Another ongoing challenge is work-life balance. “I’ve lost track of the amount of family dinners I’ve missed during the week or concert tickets I’ve had to forego,” he admits.
Stressing the importance of finding a good balance as early as possible, he warns “if you don’t pay attention to it, your health and fitness can really suffer.”
It’s OK to not know the answer immediately
To young professionals experiencing self-doubt, Adrian offers a reassuring perspective.
“One of the best pieces of advice anyone ever gave me early on was a senior practitioner who said: ‘I’ve been doing this for 25 years and I still don’t know the answer.’” That stuck with him; learning never stops.
“What you manage to work out as a junior associate is probably just as good as what anybody else might know,” he adds.
He also stresses the value of community. “Joining professional associations, particularly those aimed at young professionals. It’s a good place to know that you’re not alone.”
His parting advice: “You just have to roll with the punches and keep proving yourself.”
Connecting through IR Global
Although Adrian is relatively new to IR Global, he’s already seen the benefits firsthand. “Several years ago, through IR Global, I was able to very quickly source somebody in New Zealand who could do the work for our client. Without IR Global, it would’ve taken a long time.”
He’s now preparing to attend his first IR Global conference in New Orleans. “It’s a long trip, so I want to make the most of it.”
Looking ahead, he’s also eager to tap into the network’s expertise around compliance. “Australia’s new anti-money laundering legislation comes into force next year, and New Zealand members, who’ve already had similar laws in place, will be a great resource for us.”
Preparing for the future, and embracing the unexpected
For now, Adrian sees the firm continuing on its current path, but keeping a close eye on how technology will continue to reshape legal practice. “In the 20 years I’ve been in practice, technology has had a significant impact,” he says.
“The buzzword at the moment is obviously AI, which is going to change things in ways that we can’t even imagine.”
He’s also watching blockchain developments. “Things like smart contracts and tokenisation, that also potentially has the ability to change the way that law is practiced.”
Adrian stresses the importance of staying current. “It’s not going to make litigators obsolete, but it will change the way we work.”
Swimming lessons and dinosaurs
Outside the legal world, Adrian’s life has shifted into a new phase: fatherhood. “Despite being in my mid-forties, we’ve got a three-year-old toddler. That’s my life outside of work at the moment,” he laughs, “swimming lessons and dinosaurs.”
Adrian’s other hobbies have included photography and attending live sporting and music events. “Just before the COVID-19 pandemic hit, I took up digital photography as a hobby, but unfortunately that has taken a back seat lately.”
Still, he’s embracing this time fully: “You never get that time back, he’s only going to be young once. He won’t always want to hang out with me, so I’m making the most of it now!”
