Litigation support professionals across the world will know that having your strategy in place for how you support and manage your clients data is important
This strategy can be either to bring client data management in-house or outsource it. There is, it should be said, noexact answer to this question. The answer is more as to whether you do or do not have a strategy in place. However if you are considering bring e-discovery in-house you should do so with your eyes open.
Potential benefits of in-house eDiscovery
Firms that bring eDiscovery in-house often do so by claiming that it will result in cost savings for their client and a desire to maintain control of the disclosure process. Law firms and in-house legal departments that have invested in infrastructure, software and know-how in order to deliver this type of solution are able to save on the cost of outsourcing eDiscovery. Law firms in particular may use this option as part of their client on-boarding and retention strategy. In fact, some law firms turn their in-house eDiscovery solution as a profit centre by adopting a similar charging structure as an outsourced eDiscovery vendor.
All of this is a perfectly sound strategy, as long as it is appreciated that to bring eDiscovery in-house and provide a service that is similar to that of an external eDiscovery vendor does require capital expenditure in both the equipment and importantly the right people. In order to deploy an in-house solution you need the correct processes and expertise. Discovery processing is a full-time job and not one to be seen a part time role, it also requires continual training on the latest relevant technologies and solutions.
Potential consequences
The consequences for making mistakes in this process can be costly in both financial and reputational terms. For example in recent years The Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) and Herbert Smith Freehills (HSF) have been criticised in the High Court for their “unfocused”, “unsettling” and “less than compelling” approach to disclosure in the bank’s £4bn battle with shareholders.
