Costs Lawyer legal research

The Association of Costs Lawyers’ training material advises:

“Whilst it is acceptable to use the internet for legal research, this means proper legal research on sites such as Westlaw, Lexis, Bailii, et cetera; citing Google or Wikipedia and such as authority for any legal proposition is unacceptable”

I guess that still leaves the Legal Costs Blog as something of a grey area.

7 thoughts on “Costs Lawyer legal research

  1. Has anyone ever truly cited “Google” or “Wikipedia” as an authority for any legal arguments?

    I’ve come across some utter morons in my time, but never yet run into that.

  2. Interesting angle by the ACL; thoroughly sick of their members asking me for copies of cases, because (1) they misquoted originally and didn’t understand why I disagreed and referred them to the transcript, or (2) they don’t have access to the legal resources above (PAY then!)

    More interestingly, whilst never enjoyed the mirth-inducing “its on Google” quote yet, I have referred and had referred to me, both this blog, and that of Gordon Exall, and the Judges concerned happily concurred

  3. No Google or Wiki but I saw a notable Birmingham firm reject some case law as it was “very old”. Whilst very old, it was still valid and no ‘new’ law was offered in its place.

  4. @ charles wheatcroft

    I’ve had that too, specifically on disputes where there’s been arguments as to whether an offer had been made and accepted – seems draftsmen don’t believe Contract Law applies to them!

  5. and this is the organisation, that now wants its members to be QC’s (hint – the clue is in the name)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>