Evolution of Openlaw

The primary purpose of the Openlaw Litigation Software is to act as an electronic notebook for the case and to make it as easy as possible to produce lists of documents for disclosure in litigation or arbitration. The software stores information about each document in an electronic Document Card in a database, and with the image versions, displays a scanned image of the document itself.

The basic Disclosure information can be added to at any stage with other details if the case warrants it. The database can grow from a simple index into a store of forensic information. The investment in producing the Disclosure list in the early stages of an action is no greater than would be required to make a word-processed list. The difference is that the investment is in a searchable database and, unlike a word processed list, this can be re-used and added to as the case progresses.

Four main principles govern the design. It is easy to use; it is portable; it encourages the exchange of data between parties; it is cost-effective.

Easy to use - Evolution of Openlaw
The original version of Openlaw was released in 1993. Openlaw 1 developed into a powerful and complex product.

Openlaw 2 was completely new and particularly designed for simplicity and ease of use. It too acquired many sophisticated features and utilities over the years, largely made in response to user requests.

The current version is Openlaw 3.  There are now many other sophisticated (and expensive) products on the market. Some prospective users are put off by the complexity of what they are shown. Many users want simply to produce lists of documents and only need a fraction of the complexity. Such users would have been better served with a simpler system.

Our users range from firms with these simple requirements to firms running very large, document intensive cases and firms with site licences, where using a litigation support system is actively encouraged throughout the department and is often supported by an in house litigation support team and a scanning and coding bureau. These professional users have increasingly demanding requirements and Openlaw has developed in response to their requirements.

Portable
It is now possible to buy for under £1,500 a laptop computer with the power to run a large database and storage space for thousands of images - the equivalent of a trolley full of ring-binders. Whilst Openlaw has been designed to be shared on a network, it will run just as well on a laptop. Furthermore, the design makes it easy to copy the relevant files between two computers.

This means that you can carry all the case documents home, or to court or the clients' offices, and work on them there (or, indeed, on the train or plane).

Encouraging the exchange of data between parties
The Rules now give the courts power to require that parties exchange data, including lists of documents information. Even where this is not ordered, the interests of even the most aggressive litigants often dictate that they take advantage of the savings in costs and time which can be made by importing Disclosure information from other parties and sharing their own data.

Openlaw has been designed with this in mind.  If the other party is on your side, you can set up parallel installations and exchange whole databases - by e-mail if required. As against opponents, the public data (i.e. that which appears in the list of documents) can be exported directly from the software. Your IT department should be able to import data sent by other parties, or we can do it for you if required.

Cost-Effective
When the first version of Openlaw was launched in 1993, electronic litigation support was the preserve of the largest firms, and involved a considerable investment in both the software and the hardware to run it on.

Hardware costs have dropped and capacities increased immeasurably since then. So too has the climate in which litigators operate. Timescales and costs are scrutinised as much by the clients as by the courts. Both are now entitled to assume that any serious litigation firm will handle litigation using modern tools.

There was always the paradox that whilst the capital cost of litigation support systems fell on the firm, the benefit lay with the client. The principle of charging the client for the use of such equipment fitted neither the traditional hourly-based charging structure nor the general principles of taxation of costs.

Things are changing on both fronts. One way of leaping over the paradox is to get rid of the idea that such systems are a capital cost at all. If you have a PC, and use a bureau to do your scanning (a matter disbursement cost), you should not need any extra equipment or hardware (although we do suggest 17" screens or better). That is why we now charge for our software by the matter, on a scale which reflects the size of the matter.

Openlaw is truly scaleable, as to price as well as in its ability to run equally on a server or a laptop. In both respects it recognises that there is both commonality and difference between firms, and between the size and type of actions, from those with a single large action to those who want to run a number of smaller cases in this way.

What makes it cost-effective is partly that the cost is geared to the number of matters. It is partly also that the training and experience of users is applicable to all the matters they work on.