Relentlessly optimistic
about the future of justice.
Analysis
Close readings of the studies, statistics, judgments and speeches that shape the debate about access to justice. Every piece says what the source supports and what it does not.
Analysis / Courts
A growing number of Australians are appearing in court without a lawyer. What does this mean for fairness, efficiency and public confidence?
Research Review
Eighteen interviews and 619 survey responses. Cost was the most consistent reason for using AI, and about a quarter of users said they never relied on it alone. The headlines reported the hopeless claims.
Data
The Federal Court figure is real. It is one jurisdiction, it measures filings rather than merit, and nobody has counted how many of those people tried to hire a lawyer first.
Courts
A solicitor in Dayal, a state parole board and a migration practitioner with a $9,600 costs order all cited cases that did not exist this year. The duty to verify is the same for everyone. The coverage is not.
Speeches
Gageler CJ expects AI to overtake civil practice soon and calls free public access to judgments a point of institutional pride. Both claims matter for how we talk about self-represented litigants.
Regulation
The Federal Court practice note, the family courts' direction, the Fair Work Commission's requirements. Each says the same thing: the user is responsible for the output and must verify it.
InvestigationsIn-depth reporting on power, accountability and access to justice.
AnalysisEvidence-led explanations of complex issues.
OpinionFresh perspectives on Australia's justice system.
Letters to the EditorShort, candid responses from our readers.
Voices from the Justice GapFirst-hand accounts from self-represented litigants.
Data & ExplainersThe facts behind the headlines.