Chris Dale, founder of the e-Disclosure Information Project and speaker at Technology in Practice 2017, explores the history of Technology-Assisted Review in the courts, its judicial acceptance and what's in store for the future.
This post was originally published on eDisclosure Information Project and has been republished here with permission.
“The fact that there have been no significant judgments since perhaps indicates that the use of technology-assisted review has been judicially accepted in the jurisdictions mentioned and that the scope for arguing about it has correspondingly diminished.”
At Ricoh’s Technology in Practice [conference] in Toronto last November, I moderated a panel called TAR Trends around the World. The panelists were US Magistrate Judge Andrew Peck (now retired from the bench and a Senior Counsel at DLA Piper), Maura Grossman (formerly a New York litigation partner and now Research Professor at University of Waterloo), and Constantine Pappas of Relativity.
One of our objectives was to summarise the development of judicial approval of the use of technology-assisted review in different jurisdictions...
...The first non-US judgment was given in Ireland in Irish Bank Resolution v Quinn. The use of technology-assisted review was strongly contested, making this judgment more interesting than most because the judge, Mr Justice Fullam, was required to analyse the arguments in detail. He found in favour of the use of TAR...Read the full article at chrisdale.wordpress.com.
You may also be interested in...
Myths, misconceptions, alternative facts... whatever you want to call them, these days they seem to have a way of working themselves into all facets of our lives, and the eDiscovery industry is no exception. We dispel the 6 most common myths about TAR to help you uncover the truth once and for all.
Lawyers often think they’re experts at crafting keyword search terms to reduce the volume of documents for manual review. But as humans, they don't know what they don't know.