AboutMethodologyEditorialCorrections
For Lawyers →
Lawyer Reviews Australia

A key area for Lawyer Reviews

Audit the Independent Children’s Lawyers.

A call for independent oversight of the lawyers who speak for children in the family courts · Add your support below

An Independent Children’s Lawyer shapes the evidence in the most serious parenting cases and carries real weight with the judge. Nobody audits the work. We think someone should.

This is a call for a change to the system, not a complaint about any practitioner. Lawyer Reviews does not suggest that any Independent Children’s Lawyer has acted improperly, and no supporter is asked to say so. The register of support is held privately. Only the count is published.

The problem in one paragraph

Under section 68LA(4) of the Family Law Act the Independent Children’s Lawyer, or ICL, “is not the child’s legal representative”. The ICL takes no instructions, gives no evidence and cannot be cross-examined, and is appointed, paid and overseen by the same legal aid commission. The regulators say a complaint “must be more than a disagreement with the approach taken by, or the judgment of, an ICL” and that they cannot remove an ICL from a case. The only national evaluation of the scheme found that the child “is in the weakest position to assess ICL performance and exercise agency through a feedback or complaints mechanism”, that monitoring and complaint mechanisms “need to be strengthened”, and that at the time “Victorian Legal Aid does not have a formal mechanism for auditing ICL practice.” That evaluation was published in 2014. Nothing has replaced it.

Read the full analysis: The Child’s Lawyer Who Isn’t →

What we are asking for

  1. An independent audit function. Regular, sampled audits of ICL files by a body outside the legal aid commissions, measured against the Guidelines for Independent Children’s Lawyers, with findings published in aggregate.
  2. Published numbers. By registry and by year: appointments, meetings held with children under section 68LA(5A), claims of exceptional circumstances, court orders compelling a meeting, costs orders against parents, time to appointment, complaints received and their outcomes, and panel removals.
  3. A complaints path that works during a case. A complaints body with an express ICL jurisdiction that does not simply defer to the trial court, and that reports annually.
  4. A written, answerable position. The ICL’s recommendation and reasons served on the parties before the final hearing, so that it can be met.
  5. Accountability on the agenda of the statutory review. The Family Law Amendment Act 2023 provides for a review of its amendments three years after they commenced, from May 2027. We will put the register of support and a written submission to that review.

Who we are asking

Parents and carers who have been through the family courts. Family lawyers and barristers, including ICLs who want the good work distinguished from the rest. Academics and researchers. Children’s, family violence and community legal organisations. Anyone who thinks a role with this much influence should be audited like any other public function.

What your support does

It adds your name to a register held privately by Lawyer Reviews. We publish the count, not the names. We will use the register, and the comments you choose to give us, in a submission to the statutory review and in correspondence with the Attorney-General’s Department and the legal aid commissions. We will not publish your name or your comment without asking you first, and we will contact you only about this campaign.

We keep your details for this campaign only and handle them under our privacy policy. This form is not a complaint mechanism and cannot affect any case. If you have a concern about a specific ICL, raise it with the court or the relevant legal aid commission.

Frequently asked questions

Is this a complaint about a particular Independent Children’s Lawyer?

No. It is a call for a change to the system. Lawyer Reviews does not suggest that any Independent Children’s Lawyer has acted improperly, and supporters are not asked to say so. The form asks you not to name any practitioner, party or case.

Will my name be published?

No. The register of support is held privately by Lawyer Reviews. We publish the number of supporters, not their names, and we will not publish a name or comment without asking first.

Are you saying ICLs do a bad job?

No. The only national evaluation found excellent practitioners alongside weak ones, and judges value the role. The point is that nobody audits the work, the complaints path narrows while a case runs, and the same legal aid commission appoints, pays and oversees the ICL. That is a design problem, and audits are how design problems are found.

What will the register be used for?

A written submission to the statutory review of the Family Law Amendment Act 2023, which falls due from May 2027, and correspondence with the Attorney-General’s Department and the legal aid commissions. The comments supporters choose to give us may be quoted in aggregate or anonymously.

Can Independent Children’s Lawyers support this?

Yes, and we hope they do. Independent audits and published numbers would distinguish the ICLs who do the work well, often for less than it costs them, from those who do not.

Sources