On 10 September 2024, the first ever audio-visual legal library – demonstrating the key hearings and processes in English financial family law – arrived. Twenty years after YouTube landed, it is now possible to view the practical activity within an FDR, for example. Unlike the well-known digital libraries supplied by the international publishing giants, this library is available to all, not just those within/studying the law.

It is not hard to understand why it has taken this long to develop a digital legal library, accessible to consumers, having regard to the March 2023 LawTech UK Report: Building an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem to Improve Access to Justice. The barriers are plentiful. The result: 97% of JusticeTech funding in the last decade has gone to businesses serving corporate clients. In other words, there is no money to be made in advancements that serve the end consumers of the law. Or, that seems to be the perception of investors.

The fact that innovative educative resources are needed is not beyond sensible doubt. The fact that the legal sector lags behind other sectors in the adoption of innovative education is also clear. A 2015 LawforLife report noted:

‘justice policy lags far behind advances in financial, health and consumer education that have promoted positive teaching methodologies that are more dynamic and engaging, involving innovative on and offline environments with integrated, concrete, practical help to allow individuals to see the real-life value of education and information.’

This landscape is particularly problematic in an era of disinformation and non-expert social media loudspeakers. As the Nuffield Fair Shares Report said: ‘there was a rather chaotic picture of where divorcing people obtained information, support and advice’ which included a ‘mass of undifferentiated sources of varying authority and clarity’.

The Attorney General, Rt Hon Richard Hermer KC, addressed the Bar’s AGM on 7 September 2024 and spoke of his admiration for the Bar’s guiding mission of ‘the pursuit of excellence’. He referenced the paramount markers of our profession: truth, evidence and integrity. Our first-of-its-kind audio-visual library is a product of that professional pedigree. It can be a source of professional pride that the (family law) Bar has done it and done it first.

Welcome, Courtney

Courtney – the audio-visual library in question – is the product of the energies of a growing group of family law barristers prepared to back the purpose without getting waylaid by the prospect of profit.

Courtney’s library currently stretches to around fifty individual financial family law topics with a variety of audio-explainers, animations (with particular focus on NCDR processes), toolkits including example documents (like the FDR notes and final order to accompany the FDR animation) and articles broken down into intuitive segments. The question underlying the editorial process is: what is most helpful?

The focus, in terms of how material is presented and explained, is always upon the end consumer (the real people going through the tough stuff). This includes the estimated c.70% of the divorcing (together with, we imagine, the unmarried separating) population who do not access legal services. That said, Courtney’s materials are also helpful to practitioners, especially newcomers. If Courtney is to consumers the equivalent of having a lawyer best friend, it is to new practitioners the equivalent of an educative ‘water cooler’ experience. At a time when home-working presents a real conundrum for the training of new practitioners, Courtney is an answer to the lack of colleagues down the corridor when you might need them. Never done an LSPO? Have a watch. Keen to get a sense of cross examination about non-disclosure? Have a watch. How might a judge approach an allegation of conduct at a First Appointment? Have a watch. Keen to get an overview of section 25 as it applies on the ground in practice? Have a watch (yes, the team have animated a section of a statute).

The next topics will include Part IV of the Family Law Act 1996 and child arrangements.

How is it different?

What to expect if you venture over to https://courtney.legal to peruse? It is a little different to the existing digital libraries:

• Visuals and transparency. Show don’t tell. Any seasoned story-teller will say that. There is various evidence that supports the efficacy of visual learning in terms of understanding and retention. But this is also about transparency – these processes take place behind closed doors. There is something inherently humane about allowing individuals, who are experiencing change and vulnerability, to see a representation of what is going to happen during what could be the most momentous and important hearing or meeting of their adult lives. In no other professional sector we can think of, is there this failure to offer a view in and share a sense of the experience. The very wealthy undertake specialist witness training for a reason.
• Unapologetically practical. What is truly important? What helps? No unnecessary added ingredients. Ever read an article about law or procedure that left you feeling bloated of mind? Well, ultra-processed legal content is banned on Courtney.
• The narrative tone. An unsolicited comment from a partner in a well-known firm: ‘you have absolutely nailed the tone – it is accessible and wry with a really distinctive voice’.
  • If a newly separated father or a trainee solicitor or a paralegal are up at midnight stressing about tomorrow’s meeting or hearing, we want to talk about these processes as we would with a friend. With a side order of humour and humanity. Not for the fun of it but because wellbeing has too long been thought of something to add to a list of things to do, rather than a practical way to work or learn. There is an outside risk you might enjoy the experience of visiting Courtney.
  • Existing digital libraries and content can be stuffy and impersonal in feel – reflecting the perception of lawyers. Courtney aims to model how things should be and help overcome that perceived stuffy ‘mould’, and the barriers it brings.

• Collaboration. Innovation – particularly around NCDR – has seen growth in collaborations among lawyers and other professionals. There is no more collaborative endeavour than a library. Diversity of contributors makes the library. Courtney is not the work of one group and is adamant, as part of its mission, to feature the widest range of practitioners and expertise. So far, at this earliest stage, we have contributions from three different sets of Chambers (two more in the pipeline), a law firm and The Divorce Surgery and are partnered with, among others, The Mediation Space.

Whose role is it to inform?

Our professional community can be supportive and progressive. It can also be a little sniffy about new things.

It’s a curiosity that the judiciary often lend their weight to innovations before the professions do. This might be because the judiciary are at the sharp end of the ailing status quo. The new financial remedies pre-application protocol seemed, in some ways, to contain a little fight-back from the struggling system. Lawyers are encouraged, by paragraphs 33 and 40, to inform clients about NCDR resources and the duty of full and honest disclosure and the consequences of breaching it. This is different to advising. Informing arguably requires treating all clients to the same (neutral) information, regardless of the focused advice they require.

There are plenty of people who might doubt whether it is the role of practitioners to signpost, let alone provide access to, information and education. Putting aside the arguments either way, the reality is that lawyers already inform, educate and hand-hold but not in a consistent or accessible way. The clients who ask more questions get more information than those who choose not to. If we do not want our clients to consume disinformation or find themselves swimming around in the chaotic mish-mash described in the Nuffield Report, we need to let people know where to turn. If costs must be kept under control and lawyers should not be used as helplines, where should we suggest our clients go for high quality insight and education?

Helpful?

Justice has done worse than any other department in terms of its funding since 2010. The need for properly funded legal aid is past acute. The phrase ‘performance doom loop’ has come into use to describe the situation. Educative tools have their own distinct place in the landscape of help required for legal problems. The question professionals might ask themselves when considering Courtney in this context is the same as Courtney’s editorial refrain.

Is it helpful?

Please get in touch for a trial login if you want to answer that question for yourself.

Further reading

• https://www.lawforlife.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Legal-needs-Legal-capability-and-the-role-of-Public-Legal-Education.pdf
• https://share-eu1.hsforms.com/1uM-7uRqoRfqw3SI4CjMwiwg7g8s
• https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Fair-Shares-report-final.pdf