1. Introduction

This policy sets forth the standards and procedures that SwishJustice and our independent solicitors will adhere to when assessing cases for potential legal action. The objective of this policy is to ensure that SwishJustice pursues only those cases that are legally robust, ethically sound, and serve the broader public interest. By following this policy, SwishJustice aims to uphold the principles of justice, ensure the efficient use of legal resources, and maintain public confidence in the legal system.

2. The Comprehensive Case Assessment

The Comprehensive Case Assessment is a meticulous, two-stage process that all cases must undergo before SwishJustice commits to legal action. The stages are:

• Stage 1: The Legal Merit Test
• Stage 2: The Public Interest Test

Both stages must be rigorously satisfied before proceeding. If a case fails to meet the criteria of either stage, it will be discontinued or not pursued.

3. Stage 1: The Legal Merit Test

The Legal Merit Test is the first and foundational stage of the assessment process. It ensures that any case considered for legal action is grounded in strong legal principles and supported by sufficient evidence. The criteria are as follows:

• 3.1. Sufficiency of Evidence: There must be sufficient, credible, and admissible evidence that provides a realistic prospect of success. This means that, objectively assessed, the evidence should demonstrate that it is more likely than not that the case will succeed if it is brought before a court.
• 3.2. Compliance with Legal Standards: The case must conform to all relevant legal standards, including statutory requirements, case law, and procedural rules. The evidence should meet the legal burden of proof required by the relevant jurisdiction or area of law (e.g., beyond a reasonable doubt in criminal cases, or on the balance of probabilities in civil cases).
• 3.3. Assessment of Legal Precedents: The case should be evaluated against existing legal precedents to ensure that it aligns with established legal principles. Cases that seek to challenge or overturn existing precedents must demonstrate compelling legal arguments and have a reasonable prospect of success.
• 3.4. Consideration of Defenses: All potential defenses or counterclaims must be carefully considered. The analysis should include an evaluation of the strength of the defense and its potential impact on the overall likelihood of success.
• 3.5. Assessment of Risks and Benefits: The risks and potential benefits of pursuing the case should be balanced. This includes considering the likelihood of success, the potential consequences of failure, and any broader legal or financial implications for the client or SwishJustice.

If a case does not meet the criteria of the Legal Merit Test, it will not proceed to the Public Interest Test, and the case will be discontinued.

4. Stage 2: The Public Interest Test

The Public Interest Test evaluates whether pursuing the case aligns with the broader interests of society and the principles of justice. The following factors are considered:

• 4.1. Seriousness of the Issue: The case must involve matters of sufficient gravity to justify legal action. This includes cases involving significant harm to individuals, communities, or the integrity of legal and regulatory systems. Cases involving vulnerable individuals, such as children or the elderly, are given particular consideration.
• 4.2. Impact on the Community: The potential impact of the case on the community is assessed, including whether pursuing the case will enhance public confidence in the legal system, contribute to social justice, or deter future wrongdoing. Consideration will also be given to the potential social or economic impact of the case on the community.
• 4.3. Proportionality: The expected outcome of the case must be proportionate to the resources required to pursue it. This includes an evaluation of whether the benefits of a successful outcome justify the time, expense, and effort involved. Cases that are unlikely to result in a meaningful or enforceable outcome may not be pursued.
• 4.4. The Interests of Justice: Broader considerations of justice, fairness, and equity will be weighed. This includes the circumstances of all parties involved, any mitigating or aggravating factors, and the potential for the case to set a precedent or clarify important legal principles.
• 4.5. Deterrent Effect: The potential deterrent effect of pursuing the case is considered. Cases that are likely to deter future misconduct, promote legal compliance, or contribute to the development of law in a positive way are given priority.
• 4.6. Restoration and Rehabilitation: Consideration is given to whether pursuing the case will facilitate restoration or rehabilitation, especially in cases involving personal or community harm. This includes evaluating the potential for compensation, reconciliation, or the correction of systemic issues.
• 4.7. Alternatives to Legal Action: Before proceeding, the Independent Solicitor will consider whether there are viable alternatives to legal action that may achieve a similar or better outcome. This could include mediation, arbitration, restorative justice processes, or other dispute resolution mechanisms.

5. Review and Decision-Making

The decision to proceed with or discontinue a case following the Comprehensive Case Assessment is made through a structured review process to ensure objectivity, fairness, and consistency.

• 5.1. Decision-Making Panel: A panel of senior solicitors, including those with no prior involvement in the case, will review the assessment. The panel must collectively agree that both the Legal Merit Test and the Public Interest Test are satisfied.
• 5.2. Documentation: Detailed records of the assessment process, including the rationale for the decision, must be maintained in writing. This documentation serves as a record of the decision-making process and may be used for future reference or in response to any challenges.
• 5.3. Periodic Review of Ongoing Cases: For cases that continue over an extended period, periodic reviews are conducted to ensure ongoing compliance with the Comprehensive Case Assessment criteria. Any significant changes in the case’s circumstances may prompt a reassessment.
• 5.4. Stakeholder Consultation: Where appropriate, consultations with relevant stakeholders (e.g., clients, community leaders, or expert witnesses) may be conducted to gather additional perspectives before making a final decision.

6. Appeals and Reconsideration

Recognizing that legal decisions can have significant consequences, we provide a mechanism for appealing or reconsidering decisions made under this policy.

• 6.1. Grounds for Appeal: Parties affected by a decision not to pursue a case may request a reconsideration if they can present new evidence, demonstrate that the original assessment was flawed, or argue that the case has since changed in a way that warrants a different outcome.
• 6.2. Appeal Process: Appeals must be submitted in writing and will be reviewed by an independent solicitor or a panel not involved in the original decision. The review will consider the grounds for appeal, any new evidence, and the original assessment’s thoroughness and fairness.
• 6.3. Finality of Appeal Decisions: The decision of the appeal review panel is final unless substantial new evidence arises that was not available during the appeal process. The final decision will be documented and communicated to all relevant parties.

7. Ongoing Monitoring and Policy Review

To ensure the Comprehensive Case Assessment Policy remains effective and aligned with evolving legal standards and societal expectations, SwishJustice commits to ongoing monitoring and periodic review of the policy.

• 7.1. Monitoring Case Outcomes: SwishJustice will monitor the outcomes of cases assessed under this policy to evaluate its effectiveness. This includes tracking success rates, client satisfaction, and the impact of cases on the community and legal system.
• 7.2. Policy Review: The policy will be reviewed annually, or more frequently if necessary, to incorporate any changes in law, best practices, or organizational objectives. Feedback from clients, solicitors, and other stakeholders will be considered in the review process.
• 7.3. Continuous Improvement: SwishJustice is committed to continuous improvement and will update the policy as needed to reflect lessons learned from past cases, changes in the legal environment, and advancements in legal theory and practice.
• 7.4. Training and Awareness: All solicitors and staff working for and with SwishJustice will receive regular training on the Comprehensive Case Assessment Policy to ensure its consistent and effective application. This includes updates on any changes to the policy and refresher courses to maintain high standards of practice.

8. Conclusion

The Comprehensive Case Assessment Policy is integral to our commitment to delivering justice in a responsible, ethical, and effective manner. By adhering to this policy, SwishJustice ensures that only cases with solid legal merit and genuine public interest are pursued, thereby upholding the integrity of the legal profession and contributing to the broader social good. This policy serves as a guide for all solicitors and staff at SwishJustice, reinforcing our dedication to the principles of justice, fairness, and the rule of law.