On March 21, the Court of Cassation upheld the start-up Demand Justice. By allowing any litigant to initiate an amicable, then possibly judicial, action through an automated procedure, on the internet, without a lawyer, Demander Justice opens the access to the right. This is why we should be glad.
1 vs 0 for Legal Tech against regulated professions. On 21 March the Court of Cassation upheld the start-up Demanded Justice in the criminal proceedings brought by the representatives of the legal profession. By allowing any litigant to initiate an amicable, then possibly judicial, action through an automated procedure, on the internet, without a lawyer, Demanded Justice opens the access to the right. And exposed to the attacks of a legal profession too long sleepy ...
Accused of illegally practicing lawyers, the young start-up has been on trial with representatives of lawyers for more than three years. By proposing to litigants to assist them in preparing a proper file to bring a case before a court, Demanded Justice is accused of infringing on the monopoly of counsel and representation of lawyers. But justice, whatever the degree of jurisdiction, remains constant: the service proposed by the start-up is in conformity with the legislation in force. A verdict in favor of access to the law. Although this is a fundamental right defined in the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen and in the European Convention on Human Rights, access to justice remains a wish a lot. According to an Ipsos barometer carried out in 2012, nine French out of ten say they are discouraged even before taking the steps to settle a dispute; Almost as much judge access to justice unequal; And 70% think they would not have the financial means to defend themselves in case of need ...
In addition to the breach of equality before the law, these cases represent as many small unresolved disputes and litigants excluded from the judicial circuit. Who has never quarreled with his insurance, has never felt powerless in the face of an unsuccessful refund, or has not given up his arms before a non-refunded security deposit? Without legal assistance to set up a file, these disputes are often unresolved. But in homo economics rational, few lawyers are interested in such cases. A Legal Tech like Demanded Justice fills this market gap: almost 400,000 cases have been processed since the launch of the site, most cases are resolved amicably and 82% of the plaintiffs have been successful.
The accusation therefore turns against the accuser: shouting unfair competition on matters that otherwise would not have existed is not very loyal ... It is the concern of a profession Innovation. In 2008, the Italy commission stressed that the economic regulation mechanisms of the regulated professions "freeze the supply of services, prevent the development of employment, and do not create any pressure for innovation". It proposed to "remove any regulation for any activity where the interest of consumers no longer justifies it". Given the preoccupation of the French with respect to their access to the law and their attraction for Legal Tech, it seems that we are there.
So would not it be time to challenge an outdated monopoly? Is it really justified that a Bac + 4 lawyer should not be entitled to write a formal notice to an airline to claim defective fare tickets? The representatives of the profession brake the four irons and retaliate by proposing a "right to the prior and systematic consultation of a lawyer before any application is made". It is easier to rely on the State and the taxpayer than to face innovation. Even if this innovation would allow lawyers to find their account by replacing small disputes of little interest, more complex and stimulating cases.
To guarantee the interest of the litigant and "to build a Justice of the 21st century" as the National Council of Bars wishes it, it is to the professionals of the Justice to learn to evolve with the innovations of our century ... and quickly !
0 comments:
Postar um comentário