Trust and confidence are two very important factors for a good relationship between a client and their lawyer. However, in many cases, we find the client in a shaky state of mind even after handing over the case to an advocate. The reason behind this situation is they rely too much upon internet material which is easily accessible to everyone. At the touch of a screen, data with all information is served to them instantly. Such   ‘internet addicted clients’ are becoming a challenge to legal professionals. Their half-baked knowledge damages the relationship of trust and confidence between the professional and the client.

                                                                                                      Dr Prem Lata

The material available on the internet is not authentic all the time or tested through established parameters and standard. For example, some literature regarding legal or medical theory is put on the internet by a person expressing his view point which is yet in an experimental stage but the author strongly believes his views. Until and unless his views undergo some tests and becomes established norms in the particular field, it is yet a view only. Nonetheless, a person searching the internet for everything does not bother to choose original website for the subject and gets copied information through search engines which is not direct information. This literature if provided as an expert opinion in a medical or legal case, is not entertained by the courts but the clients press for the same before the advocate while giving his case to the professional.

 Some other challenges faced by legal professionals are:

1. Questions to test the advocate

The questions for information fall within the right of the client, which are bound to be answered in order to satisfy the client. At times, questions posed with half-baked knowledge acquired from internet searches irritate the advocate. The client, instead of explaining the facts and the relief required, focus more on testing the capabilities of the lawyer.

2. Irrelevant judgments to the case

During the consultation, client pulls out copies of the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court brought by him from his file and requests the advocate to look into it and ask to deal his case from the angle of the judgments pointed out by him. Explaining the irrelevance and inapplicability of the judgments brought by a client is a big deal for advocates and it often happen that he does not take much interest in taking the brief from such clients.

3. Pleadings suggested to be present in their way

Clients wish the pleadings to be presented in the way they want it and without asking the consent of the advocate, virtually rewrite the entire pleadings. In other words, these are clients who want to use the services of advocates like a post office. Pleadings with unnecessary and scandalous attacks on the opposing parties apart from extracts of irrelevant judgments downloaded from the internet does not attract good results in the court for clients.

4. Comparison with other cases

Due to information provided by every court online, litigants make comparison with others cases. The tricky part of litigants is that they get information right from the stage of filing till the stage of disposal of not just their case, but every other case filed in a court. They take notice of any case filed after their case, getting disposed of earlier, they question the proficiency of their advocate. They can never understand the practical nitty-gritty of procedures and the functioning of courts and any explanation given to them is interpreted as a lame excuse. Such clients keep hopping from one advocate to another, and create problems by complaining about previous advocate, relying upon online information, totally unaware of its applicability and relevance to their case.