Barrister launches billable hour appeal for refugee children

I have been away at a conference, and the two posts which I have published today were both written before I left. There will be much more in due course, including an account of the event itself.

Meanwhile, my attention back in my office has been diverted not only by the aftermath of my 10,000 mile round trip with everything which that brings, but also by an appeal launched by Sean Jones QC to raise money for Save the Children to help refugees. Just watching the numbers go up has been a full-time task.

Sean Jones launched the appeal last night, as I write this less than 24 hours later, the contributions stand at nearly £45,000 from 333 donations, 591% of Sean’s original target (see the end of this article for updated figures).

There are a wide range of views as to the responsibility for the plight of the refugees, and many more about the policy decisions which must be taken for their longer term future. The debate is not helped by those who focus more on the terminology than on the problem – we are discouraged from even talking about the subject by people who jump on and criticise every allegedly inapt expression used to describe these people and their plight – I doubt that they care whether they are called “migrants” or “refugees” when they are drowning. The politicians will be abused whatever they do by people who give no thought to the conflicting pressures and the realpolitik. There is little recognition for the fact that changing circumstances warrant changed positions.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of past conduct and whatever the wider policy implications for the future, there are children in dire straits. Sean Jones has marshalled his formidable eloquence and his networking skills (go ahead and criticise me for the use of that term) to round up contributions from a profession which is often criticised for alleged indifference to others.

The Just Giving page for the Lawyers’ Billable Hour Appeal is here. The sum raised has increased by over £3,500 since I started writing this.

Screen Shot 2015-09-04 at 16.33.12


Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Consilio extends its document review services in Asia-Pacific

ConsilioConsilio’s recent partnership with Shamrock Capital Advisors brought with it the promise of yet further expansion for an eDiscovery company whose reach extends year by year.

Consilio already has review centres in Hong Kong and Tokyo amongst the nine such centres worldwide. It has now added one in Shanghai to ensure that its multinational clients can be served wherever they may be.

The data protection requirements in China are perhaps greater than those in any other jurisdiction, and it is increasingly important to be able to handle document reviews in-country.

There is a press release about this new initiative here.


Posted in Consilio, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

The importance of instant messaging data for eDiscovery – advanced analytics for IM data from Recommind

RecommindRecommind has announced that Axcelerate 5.5 includes advanced analysis of instant messaging data which can be used for the discovery of platforms such as Instant Bloomberg, Skype and Google Chat.

Whilst Bloomberg data is relevant only to the financial industry, other IM tools are used daily for both business and personal communication. Their output is no less potentially discoverable than Word files and emails.

There is a press release about Recommind’s new release here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Recommind | Leave a comment

Judge Peck and former Senior Master Whitaker discuss eDiscovery vs eDisclosure in the US and UK

So far as I am aware, there is no competition to find the most regular participant in panels and webinars devoted to cross-border discovery and the comparative requirements of the US and UK. If there was such a contest, I would surely be a finalist, but the winner would almost certainly be US Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck.

A close runner-up would be former Senior Master Steven Whitaker who would have been the clear winner in a contest for “UK judges who know anything about the requirements of foreign jurisdictions”. That is partly because he was formerly responsible for dealing with applications to the UK for evidence under the Hague Convention, but is also because he took the trouble to study the comparative requirements.

The two of them came together to discuss global eDiscovery differences at the Exterro user conference in Portland, Oregon this week. LawTech News reported the session here and there is coverage from JD Supra here. Continue reading

Posted in Cross-border eDiscovery, Data privacy, Data Protection, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

The Information Governance Conference 2015 – #InfoGovCon2015

The Information Governance Conference 2015, or #InfoGovCon2015, takes place in Hartford, CT from 29 September to 1 October with the subtitle Take the IG Journey.

The agenda is here and the speaker list is here. That would normally be enough to entice me to go, but I cannot because it coincides with a long-booked holiday.

The event is sponsoring a number of awards, including IG Evangelist of the Year. There is a tough choice between the names of Julie Colgan of Nuix and Dean Gonsowski of Recommind; if you can’t decide between them, you could compromise and go for the name which falls between theirs in this alphabetical list.


Posted in Information Governance, Nuix, Recommind | Leave a comment

Huron Legal seeks input for the 6th Annual Law Department Benchmarking Survey

I wrote here about Huron Legal’s last Law Department Benchmarking Survey and interviewed Huron’s Bret Baccus. Huron’s summary of the 2014 survey results is here

Huron Legal and The General Counsel Forum are now gathering data for the next benchmarking report and seek input from law departments.

There is more information about this here.


Posted in Cost Management, Huron Legal, In-house counsel | Leave a comment

The future of money and data at the Singapore Technology Law Conference 2015

SALConferenceMy main reason for attending the Global Technology Law Conference 2015 in Singapore at the end of June was to moderate the closing judicial panel. As the conference title implies, its scope was much wider than pure eDiscovery and my panel was, in fact, the only one whose primary focus was on that narrow topic. That is as it should be – eDiscovery is servant to disputes, compliance and regulation, and those things are themselves ancillary to a wider commercial and financial world in which money and data are the central focus.

SALStageThe conference was organised by the excellent Singapore Academy of Law. Its programme can be found here. It was the second such event – the first, in 2011, was more focused on disputes and attracted judges from many different jurisdictions, including our own Lord Justice Jackson and the then Senior Master Whitaker. Singapore is very good at finding out what happens elsewhere and adding the best of it to its own inventiveness.

Singapore keeps turning up in discussions about the future of London as a major litigation centre, along with the DIFC in Dubai. The new Singapore International Commercial Court has attracted talented English judges; it understands, as our wretchedly useless Ministry of Justice does not, that back office systems supported by technology, together with procedural efficiency, are factors which attract major international commercial parties who can, to some extent, choose their venue for resolving disputes. This is not the place to analyse this, but it helps explain why Singapore is increasingly attractive to those whose business is dispute resolution, whether they be London barristers  or eDiscovery providers. Continue reading

Posted in Big Data, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Singapore, Technology Assisted Review | Leave a comment

CEIC 2015 – forensics, eDiscovery and cybersecurity all in one place

Guidance SoftwareGuidance Software’s long-running annual event CEIC will henceforth be known as Enfuse. My account below of the 2015 show was written before that news broke – I held it back so that I could include links to some of the videos we made there. Enfuse takes place in Las Vegas from 23 to 26 May 2016.


When you register at Guidance Software’s CEIC, you can add stickers to the bottom of your pass to show how many years you have been attending. The highest number is five, so if you have been going longer than five years, you have to add further stickers to make up your total. I have lost track of how many years I have been coming – I think it is eight or nine – and I decided to dispense with the stickers.

Not everybody likes Caesar’s Palace or Las Vegas, but what they lack in charm they make up for in efficiency and convenience, at least from a conference delegate’s point of view. The elevator nearest my vast room went straight to the conference floor and to a half-decent coffee shop. There are plenty of very good restaurants. There are rooms of all sizes to cope with crowded keynotes, the exhibit hall, the training sessions packed with computers, and the educational sessions of all sizes. CEIC attracted 1,600 delegates this year, up from 1,500 last year and Caesars Palace comfortably swallowed us all. Continue reading

Posted in CEIC, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Forensic data collections, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Distracting a lawyer’s attention with your little hammer

My article of yesterday talked about the good sense in getting to know the things which trigger antipathy among potential buyers, in this case of eDiscovery / eDisclosure software. I linked to an post of mine which included this paragraph about an article:

You may wonder, incidentally, what is the relevance of the little hammer which has been added as an illustration to the article. It implies a concealed question: “In which of these jurisdictions does the judge double as an auctioneer?”. I am at liberty to reveal the answer which is “None of them”. It derives from the overlap between metonymy and stock image collections.

 Nothing provokes an English lawyer to contempt more readily than the sight of a legal article or advertising material illustrated by of one of those little mallets which auctioneers use when selling sheep in country markets. As you will have gathered, I am not above joining in the sneers at the same irrelevant image being used over and over again in an effort to establish a mental picture for the reader. Continue reading

Posted in eDisclosure, eDiscovery | Leave a comment

Getting the eDiscovery / eDisclosure terminology right when selling to lawyers

Huron LegalHuron Legal has republished the useful article called eDiscovery / eDisclosure in the EU  written for ILTA by Jonathan Maas of Huron Legal and Vince Neicho of Allen & Overy. It begins with a guide to what “Europe” is, aimed at those who lump everywhere from Gibraltar to Skalluvaara under the same jurisdictional umbrella, and then gives an overview of the disclosure regime in England & Wales.

I wrote about that here and won’t repeat myself now. Seeing it again reminds me of an article which I wrote back in December 2011 called You say eDisclosure, I say….Whatever is right for the context. Its focus was on the terminology rather than the practice, addressing the commonly-asked question as to what is the difference between the terms used to refer to the process of “uncovering” (which is where “discovery” originally came from) the documents and other things  (not everything which is disclosable / discoverable has the conventional characteristics of a document) needed to establish evidence in litigation.

You can deduce my attitude to this from the word “whatever” in the title of that article, with its subliminal message that the terminology matters rather less than some knowledge of the relevant rules, tools and practices. Apart from the narrow point that “disclosure” is used in the English Civil Procedure Rules, and should therefore be used if that is the context (just as the CPR uses “ judgment” rather than “judgement”), I don’t much mind which word you use. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Huron Legal | Leave a comment

Roger Angarita of Guidance Software talks about EnCase 8

Guidance SoftwareRoger Angarita is Director of Product Management at Guidance Software. In this interview, I ask him about to tell me about some of the features and benefits of the forthcoming release of EnCase 8.

As Roger Angarita makes clear, EnCase 8 has new and useful features for those involved in eDiscovery, information governance and in all the many other activities for which corporate clients use EnCase.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Guidance Software | Tagged | Leave a comment

AccessData webinar on 21 August: Summation and FTK: streamline your eDiscovery and investigation needs

accessdata2AccessData is producing a webinar on Friday 21 August at 10.00am Mountain Daylight Time with the title Summation and FTK: streamline your eDiscovery and investigation needs.

You can read about Summation here and about FTK here. An article published recently by the BC Paralegal Association includes an article by AccessData CEO Tim Leehealey on the “the New Summation” which gives an overview of the updated features.

There is more information about the webinar here, together with a registration form.


Posted in AccessData, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Summation | Leave a comment

ZyLAB webinar with the Information Governance Initiative on 13 August

ZyLABThe Information Governance Initiative is a vendor-neutral organisation whose purpose is to encourage the adoption of information governance practices and technologies. Software company ZyLAB is an active Charter supporter of the IGI.

The IGI will shortly publish the survey results from its 2015-2016 annual report. Mary Mack of ZyLAB and Barclay Blair of the IGI will be giving a preview of the survey results in a webinar on Thursday 13 August at 1:00pm EDT.

The same pair did a similar webinar last year which I wrote up at length because it was so packed with ideas for those seeking to initiate and implement IT strategies in organisations; I have mined it ever since for content for my own webinars and panels (something the IGI actively encourages). We can expect the same from this one.

There is more information and a registration form here.


Posted in eDiscovery, Information Governance, ZyLAB | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Metadata matters in eDisclosure / eDiscovery. But what is it?

cicaydaAn article by Cicayda’s Aaron Vick asks the question “What is metadata?”. Those in the UK who might hope that the question is irrelevant to them might first count the number of times the word “metadata” turns up in the practice direction which governs electronic disclosure.

Many years ago, as I was about to open a half-day talk to judges about eDisclosure, a representative of one of the Big 4 consulting firms leaned across and hissed at me “For God’s sake don’t try and tell them about metadata”. That session ended, four hours later, with a judge asking “What exactly is electronic disclosure?”, and I have wondered ever since whether a greater emphasis on metadata might have been more or less helpful.

Aaron Vick of Cicayda writes straightforward articles about the nuts and bolts of electronic discovery. One of them is called simply What is metadata? giving in the sub-heading the answer “Metadata is simply the properties associated with a piece of electronic data”. Aaron opens with a simple and obvious parallel with library cards which store information about an item including information as to where to find it. Continue reading

Posted in Cicayda, CPR, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

Useful lessons from a Nuix webinar on email archives

NuixI don’t know about you, but my heart doesn’t exactly race at the thought of listening for an hour to a webinar on email archives. On the face of it, email archives fall into the category known as “worthy but dull” – important, vital even, but not the stuff that dreams are made on, even for someone whose professional definition of “interesting” is as esoteric as mine. I listened anyway – and came away informed not only about the difficulties posed by email archives but about the arguments to use when you come across them in eDiscovery.

Nuix’s promotional material for its recent webinar Right, from the start, modestly understated its scope, and by a wide margin. We got the promised explanation of the limitations of native archive search and extraction tools, and Michael Lappin, Nuix’s Director of Archiving Technology, gave us a crisp and clear explanation of the reasons why in-house and external lawyers – not just IT people – need to understand what those limitations are. What we got in addition, however, was an immensely useful explanation from Therese Craparo of Reed Smith of the strategic and tactical benefits which follow when lawyers are able to explain to opponents and the court how those technical implications feed into eDiscovery arguments about scope, timelines and cost. The messages about proportionality and burden were well worth listening to irrespective of your direct involvement with email archives.

Nuix CTO Stephen Stewart moderated with his usual calm focus. If you don’t want my report of the webinar and would rather listen to the whole thing, you will find it here. The slides, which include case references and case studies which supplement the narrative, can be found here. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Nuix | Leave a comment

CYFOR helping clients with swaps claims

CYFORI was away for part of July and missed an article by eDiscovery and forensics experts CYFOR about work they are doing to help clients involved in swap / interest rate hedging product disputes.

The article by eDisclosure consultant Lydia Hawthorn, is called CYFOR: Swap claim mania.

For many, the concept of “ Discovery” or “eDisclosure” relates to the formal compliance with Part 31 CPR and the process of review, something encouraged by the straightjacket of the costs budget rules. Lydia Hawthorn’s article rightly draws attention to the role of providers like CYFOR in helping with early assessment of a prospective case “to focus the search and provide a ‘flavour’ of electronic documents before launching a larger investigation”.

CYFOR amplifies its own expertise with the use of world-class software from Nuix, Relativity, Guidance Software and AccessData among others to achieve this objective, as valuable for investigations and compliance as they are for litigation.


Posted in CYFOR, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Xerox Litigation Services: corporate involvement in eDiscovery, TAR implementations and eDiscovery managed services

XeroxGabriela Baron, Esq. is Senior Vice President at Xerox Litigation Services. Xerox Litigation Services offers a range of eDiscovery solutions including software, services and consulting increasingly (as we will see below) to corporate clients. Its software includes the Viewpoint Software, OmniX hosted review, and CategoriX technology assisted review. Between them, these solutions offer behind the firewall or external options; they can be managed directly by the client, by Xerox Litigation Services, or by a mixture depending on the size of the case and the resources the client has available for the project.

Gabriela Baron has been involved in eDiscovery for a long time and is one of the contributors to the informative blog which Xerox Litigation Services uses to encourage good practice and thought leadership about the most effective ways to achieve eDiscovery objectives. I had the opportunity to speak to Gabriela recently, and what follows is a series of questions from me and her answers.

Chris Dale

Anecdotally, control of the eDiscovery process is increasingly passing away from law firms and into the hands of the corporate clients’ legal departments. Is this consistent with your experience?

Gabriela Baron

The market has changed and is continuing to evolve. I have been involved in eDiscovery since January 2004. In those days, I spent about 95% of my time speaking to law firms because they were the ones making the eDiscovery decisions; they were expected to handle discovery as well as the underlying legal issues. I now spend about 5% of my time speaking with law firms.

By late 2005, the larger clients were reconsidering their approach and looking at different ways to manage discovery. Their first step was hiring suitably skilled staff – hitherto they had had no internal expertise and no-one capable of vetting providers and their technical capabilities. Some law firms were better than others at doing this for their clients, and a few firms distinguished themselves by being very good at identifying people with technology backgrounds and moving them up into the discovery “lit support” arena.

Large corporations tend to use many different law firms – sometimes hundreds of law firms — that tend to be chosen for their specialized subject matter expertise rather than their eDiscovery knowledge or sophistication. Companies came to realise that they did not know where their data was or how secure it was, and often did not know who was holding the data and how financially sound the companies controlling the data were. Corporations slowly realized that in order to bring some uniformity to the security protcols applied to their data, they would need to vet the eDiscovery providers internally and enforce certain requirements of any third parties handling or hosting corporate data.

Chris Dale

Where did these companies find the skilled staff? Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Litigation, Predictive Coding, Technology Assisted Review, Xerox Litigation Services | 1 Comment

iCONECT webinar on 19 August: customise your review platform in just a few clicks

iCONECTiCONECT, makers of the iCONECT-XERA review platform, has always been good at webinars designed to help users and prospective users understand how the software works. Rightly confident of XERA’s aesthetic appeal and user-friendliness, it lets the benefits speak for themselves by demonstrating user functions.

iCONECT-XERA is strong on customisation including, for example, the ability to switch easily between languages on the user interface. That same flexibility allows iCONECT to customise each instance of iCONECT-XERA (or make it easy for the company or service provider to do so) so that the user interface can be branded appropriately, thus asserting the leadership and ownership of the project. Continue reading

Posted in iCONECT | Leave a comment

 UBIC acquires EvD, Inc. to fortify its expansion in the US market

UBICeDiscovery company UBIC originated in Japan and quickly established a niche for its specialist skills in handling Chinese, Japanese and Korean languages in line with the expansion of trade between those countries and the US.

Its eDiscovery software Lit i View draws heavily on UBIC’s parallel strand of developing artificial intelligence applications, not just for legal and eDiscovery purposes but for a wide range of verticals including medical industries.

Last year, UBIC acquired TechLaw Solutions, to promote both UBIC’s brand recognition in the US and the expansion of channels to market.

UBIC has now followed that by acquiring eDiscovery company EvD, Inc. Where TechLaw Solutions offered opportunities primarily on the US East Coast, EvD will have the same effect on the West Coast. Amongst other benefits, EvD brings an operations centre in Manila which provides data processing services.

There is a press release with further information about this acquisition here.


Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, UBIC | Leave a comment

Interviewing Chad McManamy about Guidance Software’s 2015 Second Annual eDiscovery Survey

Guidance SoftwareIn this video, I interview Chad McManamy, VP of eDiscovery at Guidance Software. The main topic of our discussion was Guidance Software’s 2015 Second Annual eDiscovery Survey which collected answers from nearly 100 in-house legal departments and eDiscovery service providers about the trends which they were seeing.

I wrote about the survey here, and Guidance Software has published a White Paper by me analysing the results, which is on Guidance Software’s website here.

We followed this up with a webinar on 30 July called Inside counsel takes control – 2015 eDiscovery Survey with Scott Carlson of  Seyfarth Shaw and Patrick Heim of Dropbox as well as Chad McManamy. I hope to publish a link to a recording of that shortly.

In this interview, Chad McManamy goes behind some of the top line results of the survey and talks about how the results are borne out by his many conversations with Guidance Software’s clients and business partners. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Philip Favro of Recommind interviews English barrister Gordon Exall

RecommindIt is easy for eDiscovery people to treat the management of litigation documents as an end in itself, overlooking or ignoring the fact that discovery is one of many components of litigation. It is also easy (I get eloquent about this from time to time, as you may have noticed) for practitioners in one jurisdiction to ignore what happens in other places where the rules are similar, overlooking the opportunities to learn things which may be of benefit back home.

Philip Favro of Recommind in the US makes neither of these mistakes and, for as long as I have known him (quite a long time now), has encouraged awareness, by his writing and as moderator of panel sessions, about the wider context in which eDiscovery sits and about the lessons which might be learnt from other jurisdictions.

It is equally easy (that is to say, usual) for English barristers to overlook the practical implications of electronic disclosure. They want the evidence, of course, but often have no idea at all about where it might be found and what is involved in collecting and analysing it. In addition, the more recent UK rules about disclosure have passed many of them by – that sort of hum-drum stuff is for solicitors, they think. Continue reading

Posted in Court Rules, CPR, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Recommind | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Interview with Judge Dory Reiling of the Amsterdam District Court

Judge Dory Reiling of the Amsterdam District Court is a well-known advocate of the use of technology to help both lawyers and courts deliver justice efficiently and at an acceptable cost. Among many other things at the frontiers between law and technology, she has been heavily involved in the development of electronic systems to smooth the path of cases through the courts.

Judge Reiling was a speaker at the LawTech Europe Congress in Prague last year, and I took the opportunity to interview her. She was understandably eloquent on the subject of her court systems project, and she talked also about the importance of judges attending conferences and keeping up with developments in areas where law and practice are constantly developing.

Other subjects which caught her attention at the Prague conference were the practicalities of dealing with evidence on mobile devices and the implications of the pending EU Data Protection Regulation. Continue reading

Posted in Data privacy, Data Protection, Discovery, eDiscovery, Judges | Leave a comment

Jeff Guttman of UBIC talks about the human element in eDiscovery software design

UBICJeff Guttman is Director of Managed Review Operations at TechLaw Solutions, a UBIC company. I caught up with him at the IQPC eDiscovery and Information Governance Summit in London in May and asked him what he was thinking about after listening to the conference sessions.

Much of the event had been about the interaction between lawyers and technology, with a focus on how new software was designed to enhance the lawyers’ professional and intellectual skills rather than supplant them. Jeff Guttman carried this point one stage further in this interview by talking about the relationship between users and those who develop the software.

His background in human review, he says, encourages feedback to developers on what users want and how they work. Developers “do not get outside the office much”, and it is part of UBIC’s culture to make sure that those who invent the tools get feedback on how they are used. Continue reading

Posted in Data privacy, Discovery, eDiscovery, UBIC | Leave a comment

Patrick Heim of Dropbox talks about the trust and security expected from cloud services providers

DropboxPatrick Heim is Head of Trust and Security at Dropbox. Dropbox has a partnership arrangement with Guidance Software, and I interviewed Patrick Heim at Guidance Software’s CEIC 2015 in Las Vegas.

For many of us, Dropbox is an invaluable tool, mainly for its ability to synchronise files between devices at a personal level. Its biggest growth, however, is in providing file synchronisation and sharing facilities for business.

The interview begins with an explanation from Patrick Heim as to his title – trust and security are key components of any file management solution, he says; care of the data, security, compliance and confidentiality, all require trust.

The growth of Dropbox’s business – it now has 100,000 companies as customers globally – reflects its ability to facilitate collaboration and control and, as Patrick Heim puts it, to “integrate partners and collaboration networks”, where use of the cloud is inevitable and companies must collaborate with multiple partners. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Wide range of subjects and speakers at InSig2 Lawtech Europe Congress in Brussels in October

LTEC2015Lawtech Europe Congress, rebranded as InSig2 Lawtech 2015, has hitherto taken place in Prague. This year it moves to Brussels, taking place at the Management Centre Europe on 26-27 October 2015.

There are two keynote speakers. The first is by the well-known Ralph Losey, National eDiscovery Counsel at Jackson Lewis. His speech is called The future of the law: the impact of artificial intelligence and other advanced technologies on the search for truth and justice. The keynote speaker on Day 2 is Marcus Hartung, Director of the Bucerius Law School, whose subject is Technology and trends in the legal market: disruption, evolution, or – just hype? Perspectives from the European continent.

The programme covers a wide range of topics relevant to those concerned at the intersection of law and technology, sweeping up both criminal and civil jurisdictions, eDiscovery, forensics, information governance and the artificial intelligence technologies which are the subject of Ralph Losey’s keynote. Continue reading

Posted in Cross-border eDiscovery, Data privacy, Data Protection, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Huron Legal, Iris Data Services, KCura, Relativity, UBIC | 1 Comment

Reminder: Guidance Software webinar on 30 July – Inside Counsel Takes Control: The 2015 E-Discovery Survey

I have already written about the Guidance Software webinar due to take place on 30 July at 11.00am PDT with the title Inside Counsel Takes Control: The 2015 E-Discovery Survey.

A blog post from Guidance Software called Panel of Experts from Dropbox, Seyfarth Shaw, and the eDisclosure Information Project to Discuss 2015 E-Discovery Survey Results expands on the reasons why this webinar is important, including the involvement of Patrick Heim, Head of Trust and Security at Dropbox.

We also have Scott Carlson, partner and chairman of the eDiscovery and Information Governance practice at Seyfarth Shaw (winners in the category Most innovative use of technology in the law firm in the 2015 LTN Innovation Awards), and Chad McManamy, VP of eDiscovery at Guidance Software. I am the moderator.

You can find the registration form here.

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Guidance Software, Information Governance | Leave a comment

Iris, Nuix and Recommind are winners at ALM Legaltech LTN Innovation Awards

I was preparing to go away when news broke of the award winners in ALM’s 2015 LTN Innovation awards, and so come to them rather late.

IRIS Data Services won the award for Best eDiscovery Managed Services Provider with it’s solution Arc, which was recently the winner also at the Relativity Fest Innovation Awards in 2014.

The Iris press release is here, and one from Epiq Systems on the same subject is here.

Nuix was the winner under the heading Best eDiscovery Processing. An article by CEO Eddie Sheehy called “Right, from the start” about the award and about the importance of processing, can be found here.

Recommind won the award for Best eDiscovery Review Platform with Axcelerate 5. Recommind’s press release can be found here.

The full list of categories and winners is here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Iris Data Services, Nuix, Recommind | Leave a comment

Nuix webinar on 28 July: eDiscovery best practices when dealing with email archives

NuixOn 28 July, Nuix is presenting a webinar called eDiscovery best practices when dealing with email archives. It it addresses a problem faced by many organisations: very large volumes of email are gathered over many years; they are the source of eDiscovery demands for eDiscovery, regulatory and compliance demands; and they are extremely difficult to search quickly when speed is important for assessing the strength of your position, for satisfying an opponent or a regulator, and to keep costs down.

The webinar addresses:

  • The limitations of native archive search and extraction tools
  • How to mitigate eDiscovery risk when using an archive
  • When to use tools that bypass APIs and why.

The presenters are Sean Byrne, Head of eDiscovery Solutions, Nuix America, and Michael Lappin, Director of Archiving Technology in the Nuix Intelligent Migration Team.

There is more information and a registration form here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Nuix | Leave a comment

APT Search is looking for an eDiscovery sales director in London

APT SearchAPT Search, which specialises in recruitment for eDiscovery / eDisclosure posts, is looking for someone to take the role of eDiscovery sales director for an international client.

The successful applicant will become part of the client’s international business development team.

The job description, together with the requisite skills and experience and the personal attributes of the successful candidate can be found here.


Posted in APT Search, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

FTI Technology webinar on 16 July: the art of cooperation: helping mitigate FCPA investigation fallout

FTI TechnologyCraig Earnshaw, London-based senior managing director at FTI Technology, is one of the speakers at a webinar run by Compliance Week on 16 July at 2:00pm ET. It is called the Art of cooperation: helping mitigate FCPA investigation fallout.

In most common law jurisdictions, cooperation between the parties is required by the rules. Even where it is an express duty of the parties and their lawyers, cooperation can be hard to achieve for multiple reasons: there are is often a genuine dispute as to the right approach; sometimes, one party will see a tactical advantage to be gained by not cooperating; for many lawyers, cooperation does not come naturally because they see their role as being combative and think, rightly or wrongly, that their clients expect them to fight every point.

If cooperation is hard to achieve in the civil litigation context, it can be harder still within a regulatory investigation such as one under the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Regulators constantly urge parties to be as helpful as possible, implying an easier ride for those who provide information promptly, helping him to achieve his objective quickly and therefore more cheaply; lawyers sometimes see the regulator’s invitation as a trap, tempting the volunteering of information which might otherwise not be found.

This webinar explores the balance between conflicting positions. There is more information about it here, together with a registration form.

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, FTI Technology | Leave a comment

Casey Flaherty talks about the expectations which corporates have, or should have, about their lawyers

Former in-house Counsel Casey Flaherty has set up a business called Cost Control to help companies manage legal spend. He makes no secret of his conviction that many outside lawyers offer poor value to their corporate clients because they do not know how to use basic software tools which will make them more efficient.

To help with this, he has devised an audit, testing lawyer capability with common applications like Word and Excel.

Corporate counsel, he says, should pay more attention to their lawyers’ competence, particularly in relation to rules and the use of technology, in the face of empirical evidence that they are spending more than they should. Continue reading

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Major Baisden of Iris Data Services talks about the Iris fixed price model for eDiscovery

IrisIris Data Services offers fixed prices for eDiscovery matters together with a managed services model which is designed to allow corporations and their lawyers to focus on the issues, the strategy and tactics of a dispute or investigation.

In this video, Iris President Major Baisden explains why he says that the traditional model of eDiscovery is broken. Its succession of stages, each more expensive than the one before, discourages lawyers from taking the next step in the case.

The 10,000 or so matters in which Iris has been engaged has allowed them to treat the whole management of each source as a unit. Amongst the other benefits, he says, is that this reduces friction between the law firm, the corporate client and the provider.

This interview was filmed in Hong Kong, where Iris is bringing the same fixed-price model to the Asia-Pacific reason region as it pioneered in the US and has successfully rolled out in the UK and mainland Europe.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Iris Data Services | Leave a comment

Xerox Litigation Services – eDiscovery Down Under

XeroxRachel Teisch, VP of Marketing at Xerox Litigation Services, is establishing a pattern of writing short helpful articles about different jurisdictions which are designed to give a brief summary of the most important factors applicable in each.

Her article from last year A game changer for discovery in Hong Kong is often re-circulated by others on Twitter and LinkedIn long after its first publication date. Another article Are China’s new data and cybersecurity regulations a wolf in sheep’s clothing? has been open in front of me when I do cross-border webinars for its helpful summary of developments in China.

Rachel Teisch has now written a short summary of the rules and practice in Australian civil courts. Called eDiscovery Down Under, it gives a brief and useful summary of the rules and the data privacy regulations applicable to Australian discovery.




Posted in Australian courts, Discovery, eDiscovery, Xerox Litigation Services | Leave a comment

The European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) uses ZyLAB to uncover fraud

ZyLABThe European Anti Fraud Office (OLAF) is responsible for investigating allegations of fraud, corruption and other irregular activity affecting the EU budget.

In 2014, OLAF investigated 1,417 allegations of possible fraud. It uses ZyLAB’s technology, and in particular its search and text-mining technology, to pursue investigations over very large volumes of data, including many new electronic formats across multiple data locations.

OLAF’s Director General, Giovanni Kessler, said recently:

We have concentrated on those cases where our intervention is most needed and can bring real added value – on complex investigations in areas such as structural funds, customs, smuggling, trade and external aid. These cases will contribute to substantial recoveries to the EU budget. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, ZyLAB | Leave a comment

Guidance Software webinar on 30 July: Inside counsel takes control – 2015 eDiscovery survey

Guidance SoftwareEarlier this year, Guidance Software undertook a survey aimed at identifying trends in the management of eDiscovery, cybersecurity, information governance and other issues. The questions were aimed at finding out what subjects were of increasing importance, and how they were being tackled and by whom. I wrote an article about the survey results which you can find here, and you can find a white paper here which I wrote in conjunction with Guidance Software.

The subject is an important one and it will be covered in a webinar which Guidance Software is organising on 30 July at 2.00pm EDT.

The speakers are Scott Carlson, Chair of Seyfarth Shaw’s eDiscovery and Information Governance practice, Patrick Heim, Head of Trust and Security at Dropbox, Chad McManamy, VP eDiscovery at Guidance Software, and me.

There is more information about this event, together with the registration form, here.


Posted in Data Security, Discovery, eDiscovery, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Smailes v McNally again: relief from sanctions refused after serial eDisclosure failures

Just before Christmas, I wrote an article called Smailes v McNally: eDisclosure consequences of failure to comply with Unless Order. It followed the delayed publication of the Court of Appeal’s judgment Smailes & Anor v McNally & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1296 (30 July 2014) which had overturned the judgment (which I called “kind to the claimants”) of Birss J. Smailes & Anor v McNally & Ors [2013] EWHC 2882 (Ch) (27 September 2013).

I won’t recite the facts again. My article says this:

I suggest you read both judgments, the original one for its analysis of almost every point which can arise in an argument about electronic disclosure, and the appeal judgment for the point which actually mattered. I use Birss J’s judgment as a training aid, because it amply illustrates my continuing theme of RTFR (Read the F* Rules).

In summary, the “kind” Birss J. allowed the defaulting party to live to fight again following a long history of disclosure failures. The Court of Appeal overturned the judgment and I said this:

This is why we have a Court of Appeal. When I read the original judgment, I thought the judge had been kind to the claimants but could not fault his analysis. Once Lewison LJ had juxtaposed the duty of reasonable search and the bare fact that there was no searching to be done because the documents were already right there, it became clear that no amount of reasonableness could qualify the clear terms of the order. Continue reading

Posted in Court Rules, eDisclosure, Electronic disclosure, Litigation | Leave a comment

Jason R. Baron: why companies should pay attention to growing data volumes and to analytics

IGIJason R. Baron is Of Counsel at Drinker Biddle & Reath and Co-Chair of the Information Governance Initiative.

He was a keynote speaker at the LawTech Europe Congress in Prague last year, where he gave us many good reasons why companies should be paying attention to the ever-increasing volumes of data which they create and keep, not just to reduce cost and risk but to uncover valuable data.

This is one of two short videos which he recorded for me on that occasion. The other will follow shortly.


Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, Information Governance | Tagged | Leave a comment

Information Governance Initiative – the 2015-16 IGI Annual Survey

IGIThe Information Governance Initiative has launched a survey whose results will extend knowledge of the spread of information governance thinking and practice and inform future developments.

They will be published in an annual report which will include materials such as infographics which the rest of us will be able to use in presentations and other materials.

Begin the survey here.


Posted in Information Governance | Leave a comment

Civil Litigation Brief is two years old today

GordonExallHow did we ever manage without the Civil Litigation Brief?

Gordon Exall is a barrister at Zenith Chambers in Leeds. Two years ago today he began a blog about his specialist fields of civil procedure, costs, limitation, sanctions and evidence, and launched into Twitter, as @CivilLitTweet, to promote the blog.

Gordon’s blog has become an essential part of any litigating lawyer’s reading, not least because it is always bang up to date. If there was a judgment relevant to his topics yesterday, than the chances are that it is already on Civil Litigation Brief, with extracts, links and comment. Continue reading

Posted in CPR, Litigation | Tagged | Leave a comment

APT Search is looking for a review manager in London

APT SearchAPT Search, who specialise in eDiscovery / eDisclosure recruitment, are seeking someone to take the role of management review leader / review manager based in London.

The successful applicant will have a legal background and at least seven years’ experience in document review, in managing others and in leading teams.

There is more information about this post here.


Posted in APT Search, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Litigation Support | Leave a comment

ZyLAB webinar on 30 June: eDiscovery-proof your email archive

ZyLABZyLAB is presenting a webinar on Tuesday 30 June at 1:00 PM EDT with the title eDiscovery-proof your email archive.

There is not much room for dispute about the importance of maintaining an email archive of messages needed to meet eDiscovery duties and to comply with the requirements of regulators. Keeping an email archive is only the start; it helps to be able to search it and to show that it is complete.

The moderator of this webinar is the excellent Mary Mack, Enterprise Technology Counsel for ZyLAB. She will be joined by Johannes Scholtes, Chief Strategy Officer for ZyLAB, and by Jason Baron, who is Of Counsel at Drinker Biddle and a leading light in the Information Governance Initiative.

The IGI webpage about this webinar draws attention to Hillary Clinton’s habit of keeping a personal email account and private server to conduct government business as Secretary of State. Jason Baron achieved national fame (to the extent that he didn’t have it already) by his commentary on this when the news first broke.

There is more information about this webinar, including registration details, here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, ZyLAB | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Recommind eDisclosure webinar: powering through investigations from LIBOR to FIFA

RecommindThose whose work consists only of litigation, of whatever size, generally think that the eDisclosure burdens placed on them are onerous. Those burdens, and in particular the timelines, can look pretty relaxed when compared with what has to be done, often urgently, for an investigation.

That investigation be purely internal, triggered perhaps by doubts about the conduct of an employee or as a result of whistleblowing; they may be external, a reaction to an investigation by a regulatory agency.

Recommind has a webinar on 25 June (that’s TODAY) at 10:30am BST called eDisclosure webinar: powering through investigations – LIBOR to FIFA. Its aim is to look at financial services regulatory investigations in particular (though the principles apply to all kinds of investigations), where technical challenges beyond mere volume, such as non-traditional data formats like chat and audio and foreign language documents meet the potential for very large penalties.

Simon Price and David Nichols of Recommind in London will talk about practical strategies to help cut through the noise in investigations and to arrive as quickly as possible at a prioritised review set.

There is more information and a registration form here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Recommind | Tagged , | Leave a comment

kCura webinar on 24 June: Second Requests demystified: using assistive review in HSR filings

kCura - RelativityHSR stands for Hart-Scott-Rodino and to the Antitrust Improvements Act which bears these names. The act requires companies to file detailed information in certain circumstances with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice who might then request further information in order to assess whether a proposed transaction is anti-competitive in nature or may offend anti-trust laws.

Either agency may issue a request for additional information on documentary materials, and it is this which is known as a Second Request. Companies need to deal with Second Requests both accurately and promptly.

If computer-assisted review is appropriate for eDiscovery in litigation then it is equally relevant to Second Requests. A webinar to be given by kCura on Wednesday 24 June at 12:00pm CDT is called Second Requests demystified: using assisted review in HSR findings.

There is more information and a registration form here.

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, KCura | Leave a comment

Contrasting “that whole truth and justice approach that us Yanks have” with the rest of the world. Really?

Those who skim articles rather than read them might conclude that this post is anti-US in tone. It is not – half my audience comes from the US and I am interested in balanced views not competing claims for purity. We all stand up for our own Discovery regimes; what we do in our own backyards is up to us. What matters in the context of cross-border discovery is that we will get nowhere if we treat the rest of the world as backward colonies who can be brought to the true path of eDiscovery by shouting our own merits at them.

Should I bother to reply to Ralph Losey’s recent article e-Disco News, Knowledge and Humor: What’s Happening Today and Likely to Happen Tomorrow? We are used to the idea that US lawyers think that their approach is the only route to “the whole pesky notion of truth and justice” as Ralph puts it, and that the “whole truth and justice approach that us Yanks have” is to be distinguished from the allegedly lax approach everywhere else. We are accustomed to the US idea that Yurrup is just one big place which has yet to learn the merits of the American way. We can give as good as we get, if we choose to, on the respective merits of our different systems and can attempt to understand what is different – not just in law but in culture – which explains our varying approaches to eDiscovery. If we are suitably objective about it, we can learn from others where that is appropriate. Or we can just write long blog posts rubbishing everybody else’s approach.

The reason it matters is that, at about the same time as Ralph Losey was pressing the “Publish” button in Orlando, I was at the Sedona WG6 Cross-Border and Data Protection Programme in Hong Kong arguing that we will make no progress in easing the path of trans-jurisdictional discovery if we simply shout our own terms of art at foreigners. As I put it in Hong Kong, never mind learning to speak Chinese – first you must stop speaking American and expecting everyone to jump to attention. It really matters very much to challenge the views with which Ralph Losey spatters his article. Continue reading

Posted in Consilio, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Tagged , | 4 Comments

Part 2 of iCONECT white paper: 4 reasons why they say you shouldn’t use predictive review

iCONECTI wrote here about a webinar produced by iCONECT, makers of the iCONECT-XERA review platform, in which iCONECT addresses some of the reasons – excuses may be a better word – which lawyers give for not using predictive review.

That webinar was accompanied by Part 1 of a white paper called 4 reasons why they say you shouldn’t use predictive review.  Now iCONECT has published Part 2 of that paper which you can find here. It addresses the subjects Confusion, Burden and Fear, and describes ways to overcome them. You can get a copy of the paper here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Predictive Coding | Leave a comment

See what you’ve been missing on FTI Technology’s new website

A little way down the home page on its new website, FTI Technology has an unrecognisable blotch of pixels with the tagline “See what you’ve been missing…”. As you scroll past it, the pixels resolve into the face of a tiger lurking in the undergrowth. FTI also has a similar one, which caught my eye at LegalTech, in which something in the water – a log perhaps – resolves into a shark when you see it properly.

Ringtail shark

It is a good metaphor for eDiscovery, where the ability to focus quickly on the things which matter saves money and identifies both risk and value promptly. The tiger and the shark clearly represent risk and you would rather spot that sooner than later; the same applies to value – if you have in your possession the document which may win your case than it is better to find it quickly. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, FTI Technology | Leave a comment

An interview with US Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck

US Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck is a tireless promoter of eDiscovery best practices. Although best known for his Da Silva Moore and Rio Tinto Opinions on the use of technology-assisted review, he is authoritative also on subjects as diverse as cross-border eDiscovery and (a particular favourite) the proper use of Federal Rule of Evidence 502d.

I had the opportunity to interview him recently and the result appears below. Among other subjects, Judge Peck covers the growing use of technology-assisted review – more than previously but not as much as it should be, he says; the role of the court in managing the eDiscovery process; the importance of reading and understanding the procedural rules; and the fact that TAR is not just a technology black box but a process requiring lawyer intelligence in training and using the system. Continue reading

Posted in eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Predictive Coding, Technology Assisted Review | Leave a comment

Bob Tennant of Recommind on a Bloomberg panel: What does the future of work look like?

RecommindBob Tennant, CEO of Recommind, was one of the panel members at a discussion at the recent Bloomberg Technology Conference.

Whether one likes it or not, technology is increasingly performing functions with the potential to replace humans, and the subject tends to generate fear on that account. It has the potential also, however, to enhance the work of people with appropriate skills, removing drudgery and allowing more considered use of results in the time freed up by release from that drudgery.

The message is an important one for lawyers and for those engaged in compliance and regulatory activities. For many people it offers career opportunities rather than threats.

Bob Tennant gives an example of an FTC document request which involved reviewing 5.6 million documents in a very short time. That task, he says, would have taken 100 people three months to do; using Recommind’s technology the job was completed by 7 people in 30 days. Years ago ago, he says, the FTC would have simply made a more limited request reflecting a reality which now changed. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Recommind | Leave a comment

APT Search is looking for an eDiscovery solutions sales executive in London

APT SearchSpecialist eDiscovery / eDisclosure recruiter APT Search is seeking to recruit a sales executive based in London on behalf of a company offering eDiscovery solutions to leading law firms.

The requirements include a “vast working knowledge of the disclosure” and the ability to develop new business from the outset.

There is more information about this post here.


Posted in APT Search, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

Nigel Murray cycles again for Help for Heroes

For several years now, eDiscovery and data privacy consultant Nigel Murray has been taking part in the Big Battlefield Bike Ride which raises money for Help for Heroes, a charity supporting those severely injured while serving in the armed forces. I usually write about it well in advance but have this year left it so late that Nigel is already in the saddle.

The Help for Heroes website is here and there are updates and videos here. As one who gets an ache in the legs on the 10 minute cycle into Oxford, I have always been full of admiration for Nigel for doing this year after year.  He won’t mind my saying that his frame and lifestyle are not obviously suited to this level of physical activity, making it the more impressive that he does it.

As I write, he is on Day 4, 45 miles from Caen to Bayeux along the coast which includes Arromanches and other scenes of heavy fighting on D-Day. Continue reading

Posted in Litigation Support | Tagged | Leave a comment

Alex Dunstan-Lee of Navigant explains the importance of the “people side” of doing an eDisclosure exercise

It is not just the technology and not just the price which matters when lawyers are choosing a provider of eDisclosure services. Lawyers have moved beyond seeing eDisclosure as just things on screens, and appreciate the people who are doing the work for them.

Prospective clients should ask more questions about them, says Navigant’s Alex Dunstan-Lee in this video, adding that he would want a recommendation about a human being, not just about a product or company. He gives an example of a question he would ask: give an example of a case where something went wrong, and tell us what you did to resolve the issue.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Navigant | Tagged | Leave a comment

Crossing borders back from Hong Kong

In case you wonder why this blog has fallen silent, it is because I am in Hong Kong for the 7th Sedona Conference Working Group 6 Cross-Border and Data Protection Programme.

That is a fairly intensive programme – a packed agenda, lots of people to talk to and some fine dinners, all wrapped around with a 24-hour journey at each end. It is quite hard to find time to tweet, let alone write anything of substance. I leave shortly for the long haul home.

It has been very good, as this event always is; there is much more to do, and at both ends of the problem – for those who want data and for those who are faced with the task of collecting it.  I will write about the issues (abiding by Sedona’s strict rules on non-attribution) when I get back.

Meanwhile, here is a picture of Hong Kong Harbour at night, taken on my last visit here in March.

Hong Kong HarbourHome


Posted in Cross-border eDiscovery, Data privacy, Data Protection, Discovery, eDiscovery | Leave a comment

iCONECT: dashboards, predictive power, robots and nominations

iCONECTA recent webinar by iCONECT was called, provocatively, Are you ready to trust your next review to robots? I missed it because it coincided with a big event in London, but it is available as a recorded download, with other iCONECT webinars, here.

Its theme is the development of the right predictive review strategy, and learning (by experience and testing) the predictive review technology which, properly used, can reduce costs, improve quality, achieve deadlines and perhaps even win the case.

iCONECT is also the subject of an interview with Ari Kaplan with the title Glanceable Dashboards, predictive power, and the future of document review. Ari Kaplan interviews Ian Campbell, CEO of iCONECT and Iram Arras, VP of Product Strategy. You can access the interview here.

While on the subject of iCONECT, its XERA platform has recently been named by LegalTech News as a finalist for Best New Discovery Review Platform; there is a press release and a link to the shortlist here. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, iCONECT | Tagged | Leave a comment

ZyLAB webinar today: selecting the right eDiscovery solution for your company

ZyLABeDiscovery software and consulting company ZyLAB is producing a webinar today, 4 June, at 1:00pm ET, with the title Selecting the right eDiscovery solution for your company.

The word “solution” in this context implies both the software selected for the task and the distribution of functions as between an organisation, its lawyers, and external eDiscovery providers. Companies face different implications depending on the number and size of litigation cases, the anticipated regulatory activity, and the number of internal investigations which must be conducted in a year.

The speakers of this webinar are Johannes Scholtes, Chief Strategy Officer at ZyLAB, and George Socha, co-founder of EDRM and Apersee. ZyLAB’s Enterprise Technology Counsel Mary Mack will moderate.

There is more information and a registration form here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, ZyLAB | Tagged , | Leave a comment

APT Search and Big Red white paper: the skills and knowledge needed for information governance

APT SearchWhen I first got involved in eDiscovery / eDisclosure in the late 1980s, the components of the problem were relatively straightforward: lawyers needed to find evidence; they were required to comply with some civil procedure rules; they needed to make a profit from a largely mechanical task seen by clients as being of low value; new technology began to appear which purported to help lawyers perform their obligations.

These were interesting times because there was no inherited knowledge to draw on, nor was there anyone with skills, let alone qualifications, for managing the transition from paper-based discovery to electronic discovery. People stepped up to manage new problems, moved sideways from other skills, and developed new ways of working. Part of this was narrowly technical – the ability to use a new type of software, for example; part of it involved developing processes and best practices; part of it involved taking skills like project management from unrelated industries and disciplines and repurposing them. Continue reading

Posted in APT Search, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Tagged | Leave a comment

Drinker Biddle names Bennett Borden as Chief Data Scientist to lead the firm’s data analytics strategy

There was a time when the roles of corporate professional advisers were sharply defined. Accountants did the sums, audited accounts and gave financial advice while lawyers dealt, largely reactively, with a well-compartmentalised class of problems which involved meeting legal obligations, securing proprietary rights and bringing or defending litigation claims; IP specialists and a range of others with specific skills or qualifications were hired as needed.

That compartmentalisation broke down when the larger accounting firms extended their roles, either by taking work away from lawyers or by offering services which met clients’ needs (whether they knew of those needs or not) and furthered their objectives. I refer in this context, as I have done before, to an article written in 2011 by Tom Kilroy, now Chief Administrative Officer and Chief of Staff at Misys, called Big 4 a reason. The article describes how the big consulting firms moved on from the provision of “esoteric areas staffed by technical propeller-heads” to a wider understanding of clients needs, to developing internal skills necessary to serve those needs, and to shepherding the clients down new routes by their understanding both of the problems and of the potential solutions. Continue reading

Posted in Information Governance | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

eDiscovery and eDisclosure in the EU – a helpful primer from ILTA

ILTAILTA is the International Legal Technology Association. It has recently been furthering the commitment implied by the word “International” in its name.

This takes several forms, most notably the annual events in London and Hong Kong (I go to both and get great value from them). It has also put its weight behind publications relevant not merely within individual jurisdictions but across international boundaries. No subject has greater potential for misunderstanding than eDiscovery / eDisclosure in the EU, particularly when looked at from a US perspective. I’d love a pound (or a Euro or a Dollar) for every time I’ve been asked to “explain EU eDiscovery” as if it were a unified concept.

To address this, Jonathan Maas of Huron Legal in London and Vince Neicho of Allen & Overy have written a short article called eDiscovery / eDisclosure in the EU which ILTA has published here. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Hudson Legal, Huron Consulting Group | Leave a comment

Bret Baccus of Huron Legal talks about the Huron IMPACT Benchmarking Survey

Huron LegalIn January 2015, Huron Legal released its IMPACT Benchmarking Survey on Law Department legal spend. In this video, Bret Baccus, senior director at Huron Legal, talks about some of the main points which arose from the survey.

No one factor, Bret Baccus says, helps with cost savings. What is needed is a comprehensive programme of legal spend management covering fee agreements, e-billing, matter management, budgets and other things.

Big companies now have better information derived from previous years’ experiences and 50% of them are using big data for rate negotiation. A combination of software tools for budgeting and project management, improved processes, and the appointment of managers dedicated to spend management is leading to significant reductions in legal costs for many big companies.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Huron Consulting Group, Huron Legal | Leave a comment

Nuix webinar on 2 June: The state of Information Governance today

NuixNuix is producing a webinar on 2 June with the title The state of Information Governance today. The speakers are Julie Colgan, Head of Information Governance Solutions at Nuix, James Arnold, Managing Director, US Forensic Technology Services at KPMG LLP and Barclay Blair,  Founder & Executive Director, Information Governance Initiative

I have done two IG panels with Julie Colgan so far this year, one in New York and one in London. She is good at drawing out opinions which challenge accepted perceptions. One of commonly-held ideas is that information governance is just a concept in the minds of a small band of enthusiastiasts; the panel will show that companies of all sizes are doing or planning IG initiatives.

You can expect this webinar to be both practical and provocative as its members talk about “market trends…the projects that are getting funded, the technologies that are enabling action and the governance structures that are getting the most attention” as the webinar’s summary puts it.

That summary is here and includes a link to the webinar’s registration page.


Posted in Nuix | Leave a comment

Epiq Systems boosts its audio discovery practice with Intelligent Voice

eDiscovery lawyers are constantly being told to watch out for new sources of discoverable data as platforms and data types multiply. Those who think only of email and word files are probably missing great deal of potential evidence.

Audio discovery is no longer “new”. In the financial sector, it has long been a compulsory source – compulsory for eDiscovery lawyers because it is compulsory for the clients to keep records of telephone conversations for regulatory and compliance purposes. Increasingly, it is not just financial businesses which keep audio records.

EpiqSystemsEpiq Systems has long provided resources for audio discovery. It has now moved that up a notch by becoming a Platinum Partner to Intelligent Voice. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Epiq Systems | Leave a comment

Reminder: applications by Friday for Browning Marean scholarship to ILTA

I wrote recently about two scholarships being offered by ILTA in honour of the late Browning Marean, one for people living and working in the US and one for international applicants.

My article Attend ILTA Conference 2015 in Las Vegas on a Browning Marean scholarship is here and the details of the application are here.

This is a reminder that application letters must be submitted by this Friday, 5 June.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, ILTA | Tagged | Leave a comment

Lawyer competence tops the bill at the 10th eDiscovery and IG Summit in London

This gallery contains 21 photos.

As I reached home after the second day of IQPC’s 10th eDiscovery and Information Governance Summit, cold, soaked through, and knackered after two days in which I had sat down only to eat or moderate panels, an email arrived…. I … Continue reading

Gallery | Leave a comment

ZyLAB webinar today: dealing with the complexity of multinational litigation

ZyLABZyLAB is presenting a webinar today, 27 May, at 1:00pm ET with the title Dealing with the complexity of multinational litigation.

These speakers are Gregory Bufithis, managing director of eTERA Consulting Europe, and Mary Mack, Enterprise Technology Counsel at ZyLAB, both people worth listening to on this subject.

It is a topic which is simultaneously well-worn and constantly changing. The conflict between US eDiscovery demands, both under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and by regulators and other authorities, and the privacy and data protection regimes of other jurisdictions, is a long running one. The more recent layers provided by Snowden and the NSA, by the Dublin Warrant case, and by increasing EU pressure, notably on Safe Harbor, makes it constantly topical.

You will find more information and a registration form here.


Posted in Cross-border eDiscovery, Data privacy, Data Protection, Discovery, eDiscovery, EU Safe Harbor, ZyLAB | Leave a comment

Jonathan Marshall of Navigant talks about Navigant’s new presence in Hong Kong

Navigant_logo2Navigant has global clients for a wide range of business functions including those which require electronic discovery and related services.

In this video, Jonathan Marshall, a London-based director in Navigant’s Legal Technology Department, talks about Navigant’s new presence in Hong Kong. It is, he says, driven by client demand for eDiscovery, forensics and data analytics services for internal and regulatory investigations and for matters relating to tax, bribery, fraud, crime and other matters.

In addition, a Hong Kong presence allows Navigant to bring its cross-border eDiscovery expertise to the region and to work on matters for local courts and for arbitration. The aim is to take the services, expertise and technology to where the data is.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Hong Kong, Navigant | Leave a comment

Revival of LiST – the Litigation Support Technology Group

LiST GroupLiST – The Litigation Support Technology Group – is a London-based think tank with international reach. It was originally formed in 2003 by a group of litigation support specialists with the aim of encouraging and developing a uniformity of approach to the use of technology in litigation and in other forms of dispute resolution.

It is intended that the Group’s work will be endorsed by lawyers and judges and evolve into customarily accepted standards and processes, thereby minimising unnecessary disruption and delay, encouraging a collaborative approach to the use of technology in all forms of dispute resolution and achieving significant cost savings for clients.

Now, in 2015, the Group is being revived by a small number of original members and some much-needed new blood. It is expected that LiST will continue leading the profession in its adoption and understanding of relevant current and future technology whilst, at the same time, uniting other local and international groups with similar agendas.

The Group’s new threefold charter is based on its original aims and its current ambitions:

Thought leadership

Together, these form our new mantra: LiSTen! For obvious reasons we intend to limit participation in the thought leadership arena to LiST members who satisfy certain key requirements. However, an important part of the “new” LiST is to throw open membership of the wider Group to all, irrespective of their experience, place of work, location or commitment. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Guidance Software releases the results of its 2015 Annual eDiscovery Survey

Guidance SoftwareIn advance of CEIC in Las Vegas, Guidance Software has released the results of its 2015 Second Annual eDiscovery Survey.

As before, questions were put to in-house legal departments and eDiscovery service providers, nearly 100 of whom replied.

The main conclusions from the survey are consistent with the trends identified last year – in-house legal departments are facing more eDiscovery work and are taking more control of it themselves, increasingly by acquiring their own software tools.

The key findings include the following:

  • 53.5 percent indicated that caseloads are growing
  • 55 percent of those surveyed review more than 50 percent of their cases internally
  • 72 percent have an e-discovery software solution, with 46.7 percent having more than one
  • 50 percent reported having a bring-your-own-device (BYOD) program in place with an average of 50 percent participation by employees
  • 44.4 percent want the ability to collect ESI from the cloud in a defensible manner

I have written a short paper in conjunction with Guidance Software which looks at some of the more important results. You can find more information and a link to the paper here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Xerox Litigation Services blog: Five Scenarios to Test the Ethics of Technology-Assisted Review

XeroxUS lawyers are much more expressly focused on the ethics of litigation than we are in the UK. A cynical US lawyer once told me that that is because there is a paper on Ethics in law exams. My own view is that this is consistent with the general preference in the US for bright lines – clear statements which permit one to say with confidence when you are about to cross the line.

The rules and codes governing the conduct of UK lawyers are no less onerous in practice – there is nothing unethical about us because we don’t bang on about ethics to the same extent. The Law Society and Bar Council are certainly focused on ethical matters and universities – UCL for example – offer courses on legal ethics. US lawyers just talk about it more.

Disclosure has always been a source of potential risk for lawyers. In all common law jurisdictions they have a duty to give full discovery whether the result is in their client’s interests or not, and they can be punished for breach of that duty. The arguments lie at the boundary between concealment and neglect or oversight. They are perhaps accentuated as lawyers rely increasingly on technology to help them with their searches. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Xerox Litigation Services | Leave a comment

APT Search expands to meet information governance demand

APT SearchAPT Search is a specialist recruiter whose focus is on eDiscovery / eDisclosure. Its founder is Amit Pandit and, so far as I can see, nearly everybody in the UK eDisclosure business values Amit’s advice whether they are an employer or a would-be recruit.

APT Search has stuck firmly to the niche area in which it began. As eDiscovery is seen increasingly as a key component of a broader information governance strategy, however, APT Search has expanded its reach into information governance.

To do that, Amit Pandit has recruited two new members of staff. Ian Bannister has over 16 years recruitment industry experience in the IT, legal and manufacturing sectors, and brings that experience and knowledge to lead the information governance practice at APT Search. The aim is to make APT Search the dominant recruiting specialist in IG as it has become in eDiscovery.

Chloe Smith has also joined APT Search with responsibility for advertising, for identifying suitable individuals for opportunities, and to assist in the discovery and IT recruitment.

The function of APT Search is to know where the opportunities are to be found and, perhaps even more importantly, how to find and attract people into it. These additions to the staff should add considerably to its reach.



Posted in APT Search, Discovery, Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Neota Logic expands into the UK with appointment of Greg Wildisen as International Managing Director

Neota LogicIf I were a technology investor, I would have put money into Neota Logic when I first heard about it. That would partly have reflected my faith in John Lord, the man who founded nMatrix, sold it to Epiq Systems and (as I recounted in this article about Epiq) established Epiq as a major force first in London and then in Hong Kong. John Lord paired with Michael Mills, the former Director of Professional Services and Systems at Davis Polk, made a combination at Neota Logic which was bound to succeed.

The second reason is that the expert system software which Neota Logic was then beginning to develop was the way the world was bound to go. Much of the decision-making and risk-assessment made by lawyers is based on rules and reasoning which are common to all matters of a like kind. Automating that aspect of decision-making is the only way in which lawyers and others with similar rules can deliver the core elements of the decision-making consistently, accurately and at an acceptable cost per matter, allowing them to add the value of senior lawyers, strategists and tacticians. Continue reading

Posted in Huron Legal, Neota Logic | Leave a comment

Major Baisden of Iris Data Services talks about Iris’s expanding presence in AsiaPac

When in Hong Kong recently, I had the opportunity to talk to Major Baisden, President of Iris Data Services, about Iris’s growing presence in the Asia-Pacific region.

Iris’s global clients are growing their businesses in AsiaPac, Major Baisden says, and the major cities of the region are not just financial centres but centres for global legal services. That makes AsiaPac a focus for future growth for Iris.

The Iris fixed price and managed services offerings enables lawyers to come across as technically aware and to decide for themselves how to add value for their clients.
A consistent theme across all regions is the need for proportionality – that the money spent on eDiscovery is reasonable relative to the volumes, the objective and the degree of risk involved. Managed services, Major Baisden says, enable lawyers to bring proportionality to their eDiscovery exercises.

Since this interview, Iris has been acquired by Epiq SystemsI wrote about that here. That can only increase the rate at which Iris will expand, in Asia Pac and elsewhere.

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Epiq Systems, Iris Data Services, Video | Leave a comment

FTI webinar on 2 June: Using Ringtail Visual Analytics on Small to Midsized Matters

FTI TechnologyIt is inevitable that most of the attention is paid to very big eDiscovery matters and to the tools and processes needed to manage them. Most disputes, however, do not have documents measured in millions. Legal teams must analyse collections of 100,000 documents, 50,000 documents perhaps 5,000 documents, and must do so accurately and at a cost which reflects the value of the claim and the budget.

FTI Technology is one of the leaders in the development and use of analytical software, and has been ever since it acquired Attenex many years ago. The latest iteration of Ringtail includes further developments to its analytical tools which, although designed to handle the biggest matters, bring significant value also to smaller ones. One of the critical factors here, and something FTI does very well, is a user interface which is easily used by the lawyers conducting the review, not just to those with technical qualifications.

Small to mid-size matters are the subject of this webinar which is presented by JR Jenkins, Senior Director of FTI Consulting and Caitlin Murphy, Senior Director of Marketing at FTI Consulting. It is moderated by George Socha and Tom Gelbmann of EDRM. Together this makes a team of which I can say (I have known all of them for a long time) that they will be entertaining as well as informative.

There are more details and a registration form here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, FTI Technology | Leave a comment

Recommind presentations: Investigations at Warp Speed: Strategies for Hyper-Efficient Review

RecommindRecommind is running a series of presentations at major US cities at the beginning of June with the title Investigations at Warp Speed: Strategies for Hyper-Efficient Review.

The agenda includes a presentation from Bennett Borden of Drinker Biddle & Reath and of the Information Governance Initiative. There will be an example of how to respond to Second Requests (and therefore to anything else) with speed and accuracy, and an update on Recommind’s Axcelerate 5.3.

The events are to be held in Washington DC, Philadelphia, New York and Boston. There are further details and a registration form here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Recommind | Leave a comment

Sir Bernard Eder appointed an international judge at the Singapore International Commercial Court

The idea behind the newly-created Singapore International Commercial Court is to expand the legal services sector and to make Singapore a centre for international dispute resolution.

Sir Vivian Ramsey, well-known to anyone concerned with recent developments in civil procedural law in England and Wales, has already has already been appointed one of the international judges along with Sir Bernard Rix and Simon Thorley QC (see article here from the Law Society Gazette about judicial recruits to the SICC). Now Sir Bernard Eder has joined them, having retired surprisingly early from the England and Wales bench (article about this in the Straits Times today) .

Singapore’s ambitions in this direction have been signalled for many years – I once sat at dinner next to Singapore Appeal Court judge who urged me to spread the word that Singapore was a place with “English law uncorrupted by EU law”. He also emphasised Singapore’s ambitions in legal education. The Singapore International Commercial Court is not the only initiative running in Singapore to capture disputes resolution work; it also has the Singapore International Mediation Centre and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre. Continue reading

Posted in Judges, Singapore | Leave a comment

Attend ILTA Conference 2015 in Las Vegas on a Browning Marean scholarship

ILTAILTA is the International Legal Technology Association. It works throughout the year, and in an increasing number of jurisdictions, to help lawyers make the best use of technology in their practices. Its main event of the year is a big conference in the US, this year in Las Vegas from 31 August 3 September – my photographs of last years’s event can be found here..

Browning MareanBrowning Marean was a partner at DLA Piper US until his death last year. He worked tirelessly and with the greatest good humour to widen the use of technology in legal practice, specifically in eDiscovery. He encouraged many of us to get involved on the same mission. He was a friend to me (I wrote about his death in an article called Goodbye old friend), a friend to more people than you would think possible, and a friend to ILTA.

ILTA has established two scholarships in Browning Marean’s memory to enable two people to attend ILTA 2015. One is for individuals who live and work in the US; one is for those outside the US, in honour of Browning’s work in bringing the eDiscovery message to non-US jurisdictions – I can attest to that, having done panels (and broken much bread) with him in London, Munich, Sydney, Hong Kong and Singapore, as well as in the US. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, ILTA | Tagged | Leave a comment

Not just eDiscovery: iCONECT in Outer Space

iCONECTThe eDiscovery bubble – the lawyers and the discovery providers who manage eDiscovery all the time – tend to think of the world only in eDiscovery terms, that is, collecting, analysing, reviewing and producing documents and data for the purpose of complying with eDiscovery rules or the demands of regulators.

Some very sophisticated software tools have been developed to meet those demands, and it is good to be reminded that all that power and sophistication can usefully be applied to other things – anything where it is necessary to identify valuable data from the mass, to conduct analysis on it, and to share both the inputting and the results with others.

An extreme example appears in a video interview called iCONECT in Outer Space. Monica Bay, (Fellow, The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics (CodeX)) asks Ian Campbell, iCONECT’s President and CEO, what is the most interesting case in which iCONECT has been involved. Ian Campbell’s answer involves the 2003 Columbia Shuttle disaster: NASA had a vast quantity of data and needed to set a large team from around the world on the task of analysing it and reviewing it. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, iCONECT | Tagged | Leave a comment

Something for everyone at CEIC in Las Vegas

Guidance SoftwareCEIC is the Computer Enterprise Investigations Conference, run every May by Guidance Software, and this year once again at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. It takes place from 18-21 May and I will be there, as I have been for many years. Here are some of the photographs which we took last year.

CEIC began as a forensics event, just as Guidance Software itself began as a forensics company. Over the years CEIC has extended its remit in line with Guidance Software’s expansion into eDiscovery and cybersecurity. Delegates can advance their EnCase certifications, see software demonstrations, hear about trends in eDiscovery and security matters, and mix with others with the same interests and problems from all over the world. The latter point is is emphasised by the fact that the event includes training sessions for Spanish speakers given by Spanish speakers.


The event is hosted also to Guidance Software’s CISO/CLO Summit on 18 May. On past form, it will be host also to many dinners, parties and other social events. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Forensic data collections, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

Information Governance and eDiscovery Summit in London on 12-14 May

This year sees the 10th anniversary of the Information Governance and eDiscovery Summit, to be held at the Waldorf Hilton in London between 12 and 14 May.

Chris Dale IQPC 2014This event is, by a wide margin, the biggest event in the UK eDiscovery calendar. I have been going since 2007, first as a delegate and then as a participant – I seem to be involved as moderator of five different panels this year, which may make me seem not entirely objective in suggesting that this is the event to go to. I think you should, not just for the (extremely good) content but for the opportunity to meet others with the same problems as you and those offering solutions.

Some of my photographs for the 2014 Summit can be found here together with short notes about some of the sessions.

There been two major shifts in this event over the time I have been going to it. There used to be a sharp division between what was then called Records Management and eDiscovery, with a separate day for each. Whilst these remain separate disciplines, the conference agenda reflects the fact that organisations are increasingly (and rightly) seeing the problems and the potential of data as related aspects of the same topic. Information governance is a broad label for a set of functions defined by the Information Governance Initiative as:

“The activities and technologies organizations employ to maximize the value of their information while minimizing associated risks and costs”

We are increasingly seeing overlaps between the technology, the processes and, not least, the people applied to all the subjects which fit under the IG umbrella, and that is reflected in many of the sessions. Continue reading

Posted in Consilio, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Huron Legal, Iris Data Services, Navigant, NightOwl Discovery, Recommind, Relativity, Relativity, UBIC | Leave a comment

Cicayda helps law students build apps for access to justice and this may benefit all of us

What connects a law school course run by a Nashville-based eDiscovery software company and a legal expert systems company with a UK report on access to justice? And what has any of these to do with the recruitment of young people into law and eDiscovery?

Those of you who has been with me for the long-term, both on this blog and on Twitter, will have noticed some diversification in what I write about, particularly over the last year or so.

The conventional eDiscovery / eDisclosure topics of rules, increased volumes, new types of data sources, and ever more sophisticated technology remain constant themes; information governance and cybersecurity have become an inevitable component of any discussion about the management of data; the Asia-Pacific region becomes increasingly significant. Alongside these things, however, you will have seen a growing interest in access to justice and in the recruitment of new entrants into the discovery and information governance markets.

The UK has seen an unprecedented assault by government on the delivery of justice, and not only for those for whom it has always been too expensive. It is not just a matter of economics – a nasty, ignorant and dishonest Justice Minister, Chris Grayling, aided by the supine and incompetent paper-shufflers at the Ministry of Justice, has deliberately undermined the provision of justice in both the civil and criminal courts, with a series of measures which have increased fees and reduced facilities to the detriment of individuals, companies and the courts themselves. It is not just social conscience which compels lawyers, eDiscovery providers and others to think how they can help deliver access to justice whilst making a living for themselves, but that has been an important element. Continue reading

Posted in Access to Justice, Cicayda, Civil justice, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure | Leave a comment

A new release from Nuix and some events for its users

nuix-logo-taglineThe thing about Nuix, from a commentator’s point of view, is that it has always got something new to say, across multiple fronts and in many jurisdictions at once. If, as I just have, you have a run of events which keep you from your desk and then a week’s holiday, you come back to a big list of things which Nuix has done or plans to do. It makes sense to roll some of them into one article.

The big news is the release of Nuix 6 .2 – you will find a page about it here which links to a Fact Sheet. It also has a video in which CTO Stephen Stewart describes succinctly the new functions and benefits. You get more facts per minute from Stephen Stewart than from anybody else in eDiscovery, and the video is the fastest way of finding out what Nuix 6.2 offers.

If you prefer written words to video, a description of Nuix 6.2 can be found here. eDiscovery customers get email threading, and a search and tag tab and new analytics; those concerned with information governance get new tools which allow IG to be managed as a continuing housekeeping exercise rather than a set of individual projects; investigators get yet more powerful analytics and further integration between desktop and web applications to make digital evidence more accessible to those without specialist technical skills; all of these interest groups gain from improvements in Nuix Director and Nuix Web Review and Analytics. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Nuix | Tagged , | Leave a comment

kCura launches Relativity 9.2 at its Spring Roadshow in London

I was one of around 350 guests at kCura’s Relativity Spring Launch in London last week. Before saying anything about the event or the product, I should note that an assembly of this size with a sole focus on eDiscovery / eDisclosure (never mind that it was about a single product) would have been inconceivable even three years ago.

kCura avoided glitz and over-the-top frills, perfectly pitching the production values for a UK audience: the London-themed backdrop signified restrained quality; when it was time to start, kCura’s Steve Couling ambled onto the stage without fanfare and welcomed us with some brief facts about kCura’s EMEA region which is his responsibility.

Steve Couling of kCura

Then came CEO Andrew Sieja, who has the knack of conveying that while this is now a big company with a worldwide footprint, the audience is still part of a family, and that success is a shared ambition. Software engineers and people from support and training all matter, and the large (and growing) body of resellers, consultants and users are all participants.

Andrew Sieja kCura Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, KCura, Relativity | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Huron Legal expands its litigation management services with Allegory Law alliance

Huron LegalLitigation is a project in which the prime lawyer input of strategy, tactics and advocacy is only a part of the set of factors which must be marshalled and controlled to bring a case to a successful conclusion on time and within budget.

In addition to its pure eDiscovery services, Huron Legal offers a range of software tools and services to help litigation departments manage all aspects of their cases and, in particular, to organise, connect and retrieve all the key activities and evidence of a litigation matter.

To supplement its many home-grown resources, Huron Legal has been careful to acquire businesses (I wrote about its acquisition of Sky Analytics here) and to enter into alliances with companies with tools which add to Huron’s ability to help law firms and legal departments. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Huron Consulting Group, Huron Legal | Leave a comment

APT Search is looking for an eDiscovery Product Specialist for London

APT SearchAPT Search, which specialises in recruitment for eDiscovery / eDisclosure, is looking on behalf of a client for a product specialist to work as part of “client support services”.

The person they are seeking will be used to working directly with clients to create and present workflow and similar documents and will have experience at providing product training.

There is more information about this post here.


Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Litigation Support | Leave a comment

EDRM webinar on 23 April: using FTI Ringtail to modernise keyword search

FTI TechnologyFTI Technology is sponsoring an EDRM webinar on 23 April (that’s today) called Using FTI Ringtail to Modernise Keyword Search for Efficiency and Better Discovery Outcomes. The presenters are JR Jenkins, senior director of FTI Consulting and Jason Ray, Managing Director of Technology Consulting at FTI. The moderators are George Socha and Tom Gelbmann of EDRM.

The use of simple keywords, or of keywords in combination with other keywords, is a deceptively simple way of searching for documents for eDiscovery / eDisclosure purposes. Lawyers like them, not merely because they seem it easy to define, but because it is a relatively straightforward matter to propose and to try and agree them with opponents

The subject comes up in any conversation about more sophisticated technology – it did so for me a couple of days ago, for example, in a discussion at  law firm about the use of technology-assisted review.

The idea has grown up that keywords are somehow an inadequate alternative to the sophistication of predictive coding and other forms of technology assisted review. One can easily point to the defects of pure keyword searching, which takes no account of misspellings, aliases and synonyms, and which can both miss vital documents and return others which have nothing to do with the desired subject matter. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, EDRM, Electronic disclosure, FTI Technology, RingTail | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Cut off in the country

I was away last week, which is why there were no posts, no updates to my Rebelmouse news pages, and few tweets.

We were at the far end of Worcestershire, in a large house which had been taken by a friend celebrating her 60th birthday. You get some idea of the scale of it when I say that it had its own steam railway in the grounds – on your sixth birthday, you may get to ride behind a steam engine; on your 60th, you get to drive it.

Model Steam Engine

I have no particular issue with working on holiday; the problem was a practical one to do with access to the outside world. The broadband was intermittent, and neither of my mobile phone providers think it important to connect their paying clients once they move out of urban areas (indeed, O2 is unavailable in parts of North Oxford). Like those other shysters, the train operating companies, they are happy to take your money up front but have no ambition to provide a service, nor shame at their failure to do so. Between them, the incompetent and greedy comms and railway companies provide an effective brake on the development of business outside the major cities. Continue reading

Posted in CEIC, Guidance Software, IQPC, KCura | Leave a comment

Epiq Systems grows its eDiscovery managed services by acquiring Iris Data Services

epiq_110Although I cannot claim to have predicted that Epiq Systems would buy Iris Data Services, it is one of those acquisitions whose logic seems entirely obvious as soon as it is reported.

Epiq has long shown inventiveness and consistency in its acquisitions, broadening the range of software and services which it offers by buying successful players, as well as by organic growth. It has also spread its eDiscovery net wider in geographic terms, not least in Canada, China and Japan.

iris_orb_flatNo eDiscovery company has been more visibly successful recently than Iris Data Systems. Its managed services provide price certainty across multi-year contracts which combine the best third-party technology and Iris’s proprietary workflow, storage, security and evidence management software. The Iris Arc solution is the most recent winner of Relativity’s Best Service Provider Solution in its Innovation Awards – I wrote about them here

The growing demands for these services (and Iris itself) were specifically referred to in my recent article Electronic Discovery: the In Housers Take Charge in which I mentioned Iris as the obvious example of a provider to whom corporations would delegate eDiscovery functions.

Epiq’s announcement of the acquisition is here, with more information on the strategic and investment value of the Iris acquisition, is here.



Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Epiq Systems, Iris Data Services, KCura, Relativity | Leave a comment

Electronic Discovery: The In-housers take charge

The Spring edition of Ethical Boardroom carries an article by me called Electronic Discovery: The in-housers take charge. You will find it at page 135 here

I do not usually write for other publications. I have to produce quite enough words for my own blog, and I resent the sub-editing which usually goes with writing for third parties – they have sub-editors who have to keep themselves amused, which they usually do by frigging around with my punctuation and offering alternative wording for sentences which I have spent ages crafting. I have to say that, in addition to its other virtues (have a look at the rest of the Spring edition to see what I mean), Ethical Boardroom was good on this front.

The bait offered to me in this case was two-fold: first it was an opportunity to reach board level people who are not necessarily aware of developments in electronic discovery; and second, Jason Baron had written for a recent edition (his article Information Governance to Take Centre Stage was published in January). The implication was that if the magazine was good enough for Jason Baron, it was good enough for me; quite right.

There was a third attraction: I could write about anything I liked. You can deduce from the title that I covered the shift in responsibility for eDiscovery as organisations increasingly take control of it. That control may involve a company taking on software and staff to manage at least the early stages of eDiscovery with their own resources; it may involve the assumption of a greater degree of direction and control than hitherto; it may take the form of managed services agreements with, say, Iris Data Services, and a requirement that the external lawyers use them. Continue reading

Posted in Guidance Software, Huron Consulting Group, Huron Legal, Iris Data Services | Leave a comment

Relativity Innovation Awards at Relativity Fest

Relativity_72ppikCura’s Relativity Fest takes place this year between 11 and 14 October in Chicago.

kCura has announced the 2015 competition for the Relativity Innovation Awards, open to customers who are building outstanding applications and integrations on top of the Relativity platform.

They are looking for a Best Law Firm or Corporate Solution and a Best Service Provider Solution. The finalists’ and winners’ solutions will be displayed at Relativity Fest. The competition opens on 30 April.

The winner of the 2014 Best Service Provider Solution was Iris Arc from Iris Data Services. The Best Law Firm Solution was SynQ by Troutman Sanders.

The Relativity Fest site is here. There is a special introductory rate of $625 for delegates until 15 May.

On the subject of kCura, the Relativity Spring Launch Roadshow will take place not only in London, but also in New York, Washington D.C. and San Francisco. There is more information about that here.

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Iris Data Services, KCura, Relativity | Leave a comment

Technology Law Conference 2015 in Singapore: the Future of Money and Data

Singapore ConferenceThe Singapore Academy of Law is organising a conference to take place in Singapore on 29 and 30 June. It is called Technology Law Conference 2015: the Future of Money and Data.

Its theme is that technology offers both utopian and dystopian positions in relation to data and money, with the benefits of greater access balanced by fears of “digital catastrophe and virtual nightmare” thanks to privacy breaches, identity theft and other symptoms of financial vulnerability.

I took part in the last big international event organised by the Singapore Academy of Law in 2011. It was one of the most interesting events I have attended and one which made it clear that Singapore was ambitious to attract international dispute resolution business. Much has happened since then, not least the development of the Singapore International Commercial Court (SICC), the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and the Singapore International Mediation Centre (SIMC). Continue reading

Posted in Cross-border eDiscovery, Data privacy, Data Protection, Data Security, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Singapore | Leave a comment

ILTA in Nashville in August 2014

ILTA’s big show took place at the Gaylord Opryland Resort & Convention Center in Nashville in August 2014. Somewhat belatedly, here are some of the pictures which I took then, partly as encouragement to those who might want to go in 2015 (it is in Las Vegas from 31 August to 3 September) and partly as an element in my record of 2014. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, ILTA | Leave a comment

Catching up with Epiq Systems in Hong Kong

epiq_110I like to look in on Epiq Systems  when I am in Hong Kong to catch up with what is going on, and I had a meeting on my recent trip with Celeste Kemper, Director of Document Review Services, Asia, Nathan Hughes, Business Development Director, Asia and Stuart Baxter, Operations Director, Asia.

I remember the first time I heard about Epiq Systems’ plans to set up in Hong Kong. It was at an Epiq Christmas party some years ago, and John Lord, who had founded nMatrix before its acquisition by Epiq, and then established Epiq’s London presence, said that he planned to repeat that successful exercise in Hong Kong.

I knew nothing about Hong Kong then, but I did know that if John Lord had set his sights on something it was likely to happen, and shortly afterwards it did. It has been a remarkably successful endeavour. Over the years, I have taken part in educational lunchtime sessions with law firms in Epiq’s company, participated in an eDiscovery Roundtable, taken part in an Epiq panel about the then pending eDiscovery practice direction and, at a conference last year, made a set of videos with Celeste Kemper, Nick Rich and (a first for me) one in Mandarin with Jennifer Qian. (you can find them, with other videos from that event, here). I have more than once heard rivals in the region accept grudgingly that Epiq is doing well there, perhaps the best sort of reference you can get. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDiscovery, Epiq Systems, Hong Kong | Leave a comment

CEIC in Las Vegas in May 2014

CEIC, the Computer Enterprise Investigations Conference is run by Guidance Software. This year’s CEIC takes place from 18-21 May and is again at Caesars Palace in Las Vegas. I will be there.

Here are some of the photographs which I took there last year. Continue reading

Posted in CEIC, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Guidance Software | Leave a comment

The judgment and some newspaper comment on the Irish TAR case

If you read my article TAR-red with the same brush in the US and Ireland, you will have concluded that I had a copy of the judgment in Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd v Sean Quinn and ors about the use of predictive coding / technology-assisted review, and you may have wondered why I did not link to it.

The answer is that it had not been published. It now has been published and is here, and I am obliged to barrister Tim O’Connor @timoconnorbl for pointing us to it.

Even if you have already read my summary, you may find the detail in the judgment worth reading. In Ireland, as in England and Wales, Judges make decisions about matters of this kind using their discretion after hearing argument from both parties. The decision is peculiar to its facts and to the balance of expense against the risk in that case that documents will be missed. As I suggested in my earlier article, (and as was argued by the defendants in this case) the Irish rules may be taken to mean that the party certifying the completeness of discovery is 100% sure that all relevant documents have been found. The judge easily dismissed that proposition, but anyone else going over the same ground will have to undertake the same painstaking exercise as did Karyn Harty of McCann FitzGerald in this case, explaining carefully what the costs implications are of one route versus another and showing why the risk of omission was a small one. Continue reading

Posted in Court Rules, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, Ireland, Litigation, Predictive Coding, Technology Assisted Review | Leave a comment

Consolidation on a single blog

My recent post, Taking a breather from eDiscovery events, did not intend to give the impression, as it did to at least one person, that I am knocking off for a bit. That’s a nice thought, but the only thing which diminishes for a while is the getting on trains or planes all the time so that I can actually spend some time at my desk.

That article said that I am consolidating my blogs, and that takes place from now. This blog,, has been running since 2007. We have recently given it a facelift, with a new and cleaner theme and a better way of displaying photographs and videos.

I have long had a second blog which has been through three different iterations, most recently at (one of them was on Google+ which shows that we can all make mistakes in social media). That blog, in its various homes, has been the repository of industry updates which do not require the weigh-every-word thoughtfulness of the commentary so that adding posts should be quick and easy to do. Continue reading

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Taking a breather from eDiscovery events

Apart from a couple of webinars and the occasional lunchtime event in London, I am gratefully back at my desk for most of the time between now and mid-May. That is deliberate, and I need it, not just to keep abreast of new developments as they occur, but to round up past events and to spend some time thinking about the best ways of reaching new audiences.

The big events so far this year have been Legaltech in New York and Legaltech Hong Kong, both of which warrant a belated summary. We (my son William and I) took a lot of photographs and recorded several videos at both these events. You may have noticed some recent posts on this site which consist largely of photographs of last year’s events with a brief explanation of who was involved and what was covered. 2014 was a stupid year for travel which is why it has taken a while to get the photographs out.

The videos take even longer to do. We don’t just stick an iPhone in a supplier’s face and get them to bang on about their products, but try to capture some thoughtfulness from a range of people and present it properly. We are evolving different ways of presenting these. Continue reading

Posted in Bill Belt, Cicayda, CKS, Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, News, Nuix, Recommind | Leave a comment

eDiscovery conference agenda focuses on non-conventional data sources

In offering you the agenda of the Third Annual Electronic Discovery Conference at Levin College of Law at the University of Florida, I am not seeking to encourage you to attend – you will have to run, since it takes place today.

The reason it is interesting – and in any jurisdiction – is that its focus is on the non-traditional data sources which one might easily overlook when giving eDiscovery / eDisclosure or seeking it from others.

There is a session about collecting data from Google, iCloud and MS Office 365, one about mobile devices including GPS data, one about Big Data and the Internet of Things and three about social media.

There remains a rather odd assumption that these things only turn up in matrimonial and personal injury disputes. If you look around any organisation, of whatever size (and including law firms), you will quickly observe that a very high proportion of the data created, kept and received comes from or through one of the sources referred to in the agenda. They may not look like “documents”, but they are no less potentially discoverable – I stress “potentially” because I am not urging anyone to rush off and collect data from all these sources or to demand it of opponents. One ought, however, to apply one’s mind to the possibility that the data of this kind may be both discoverable (in the formal sense of the rules) and contain evidence which many affect your view of the case. Continue reading

Posted in Discovery, eDisclosure, eDiscovery, Electronic disclosure, iCONECT, KCura, Nuix, Relativity | Tagged | Leave a comment

ZyLAB webinar on 2 April – Bridging the gap between Legal and IT to increase efficiency and reduce risk

zylablogoZyLAB is sponsoring a webinar on 2 April with the title Bridging the gap between legal and IT to increase efficiency and reduce risk. I am one of the participants; the other is Mary Mack, Enterprise Technology Counsel at ZyLAB.

Legal and IT departments are not necessarily the only interest groups within an organisation who are affected by demands for documents and data – HR, privacy and compliance people and a range of other specialists may have to get involved when eDiscovery demands arise.

Legal and IT do not necessarily have parallel interests here – the job of IT is to enable the creation and safekeeping of data; Legal needs to be able to find the information they need, often quickly. That can be expensive; it also imposes stress on departments who are already busy with routine work.

Information governance is a wide topic with many facets. It includes, among other things, the processes and ground rules needed to classify information both by subject and by including, where possible, a flag to indicate that documents have no value and can be deleted. In this webinar, we will look at the risks and costs, and also at the value, which can be managed more efficiently by a programme of defensible information governance.

There is more information and access to a registration form here.

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

UBIC takes part in research on AI-based system to mitigate patients at risk of falling

UBICOne of the challenges in trying to encourage lawyers to rely more on technology is that they find it hard to believe that a machine can supplant their hard-won knowledge and skill. In fact, of course, the technology used in electronic discovery is not a replacement for that skill but an adjunct to it. It achieves this in two broad ways – by performing repeatable tasks quickly and consistently and by drawing provisional conclusions which the lawyers can then check.

This is a kind of artificial intelligence, or AI, and similar applications are in use, and have been for some time, in a wide range of industries and activities which are of no less significance than compliance with eDiscovery obligations. One of these is healthcare.

UBIC made its name as a provider of litigation support software and big data analysis services and it has been working to apply its skills to a variety of requirements. The most recent of these is in the field of healthcare. UBIC has been conducting joint research with the NTT medical centre in Tokyo on a project whose purpose is to assess the risk that patients will fall over. Each patient’s risk is calculated using an assessment tool which takes account of symptoms and other factors. Like eDiscovery, it requires a mixture of objective fact, computing tools and human input, the latter in the form of the skills of experienced staff.

This has obvious benefits for patients. It has benefits also for the hospital because the patient who falls over spends more time in hospital as a result.

This is interesting stuff. There is a press release about it here.

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Sensitive Data Finder from Nuix

NuixNewLogo2Nuix has launched Sensitive Data Finder, a new tool designed to aid compliance with privacy laws and data protection regulations amongst other things.

Its secret is the ability to identify high-risk and high-value information very quickly. If you have identified this before a data security breach, the company knows what it has got, where it is, and who has access to it.

Nuix Sensitive Data Finder makes use of all the Nuix searching power across all the endpoints, allowing advanced searches to be made without storing a permanent index.

There is more information about Nuix Sensitive Data Finder here.

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment

Relativity blog: 3 Takeaways from Judge Peck’s Rio Tinto opinion

relativityInevitably, there has been a great deal of comment on the recent Opinion delivered by US Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck in the Rio Tinto case. I wrote about it, in tandem with a summary of an Irish judgment of the same week, in an article called TAR-red with the same brush in the US and Ireland.

One of the most succinct summaries comes from Constantine Pappas at kCura, in an article called More Da Silva: 3 Takeaways from Judge Peck’s Rio Tinto Opinion. I mention it partly because it lives up to its title, with three short points of value, and partly because Constantine Pappas and I have shared views on this subject ever since I did a panel with him at Relativity Fest a couple of years ago.

The three takeaways which Constantine identifies are:

1. Producing parties don’t need to worry about approval for computer-assisted review

2 Transparency and cooperation are essential, but sharing seed documents may not be…

3 … because no one protocol can dictate every computer-assisted review project.

Whilst I am aware that this took no particular gift of prophecy on our part, these are the same points that Constantine Pappas and I isolated in a chat about predictive coding technology assisted review just before Christmas. The pure technology is, of course, important. What is very much more important is to fit it into the framework required by the rules and into an approach which attaches as much weight to common sense and proportionality as it does to statistics and algorithms.

Posted in Litigation Support | Leave a comment