We are continuing to showcase the top 10 most viewed blogs of the ADR Research Network. We’re up to the third most viewed blog. A thought provoking blog on an important DR issue by our esteemed colleague and friend Dr Olivia Rundle.
The traditional lawyer is described as the “adversarial advocate”. I have been contemplating what this actually means when the traditionally oriented lawyer works within the context of dispute resolution. What does “adversarial” mean – does it mean to be oppositional with others or does it mean to be partisan for the client? What does “advocate” mean – does it mean to put an argument on behalf of the client or is it a substitute for the title “lawyer”? If it means the former, does an advocate necessarily act as spokesperson and the client refrain from participation?
Let’s start with some dictionary definitions of each of the words. These are taken from the online Oxford Dictionary.
“Adversarial” is an adjective and has two meanings. First, “involving or characterised by conflict or opposition”. This meaning brings in a competitive flavour. Secondly, a law specific meaning of adversarial is offered in the…
View original post 233 more words
The Australian Dispute Resolution Research Network 
Readers interested in Olivia’s blog should also have a look at the work of another member of the Network (and esteemed colleague and friend!) Associate Professor Bobette Wolski’s contribution to thinking on this point: Bobette Wolski, ‘On Mediation, Legal Representatives and Advocates’ (2015) 38 University of New South Wales Law Journal 5-45.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The body of work by members of the ADR Research Network on these topics is really amazing! 🙂
LikeLike