Electronic Litigation Challenges for Corporate Counsel: An Interview with Bryan Ghows | #ICEL2011

The e-Litigation Blog team had a chance to catch up with Bryan Ghows who is chairing the Corporate Counsel Session on Day 1 of the Conference.

Bryan brings unique insights from both sides of legal practice – as a lawyer in private practice specialising in IP / IT law at Singapore law firm, Unilegal LLC; and prior to that, fifteen years as corporate counsel at Microsoft and IBM.

At Microsoft, Bryan was the lead attorney for the Windows division and dealt with legal issues relating to all Windows products. The “reasonable anticipation of litigation” standard adopted by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure in the United States meant that companies like Microsoft, with stringent compliance policies, was constantly issuing litigation hold notices. Bryan’s role as corporate counsel for Microsoft involved administering the company’s litigation hold processes as well as pre-litigation records management and litigation readiness counseling.

We asked Bryan what he considered to be the foremost challenge facing corporate legal departments today.

He answered that the exponential growth of email and the proliferation of electronically stored information has changed the way organisations approach litigation, due diligence and regulatory investigations, both from a legal and operational standpoint. In complex litigation today, document review encompasses anywhere between 60 – 90% of the total litigation cost. There is a sense that in-house lawyers must step up to the mark quickly as the disciplined management of electronic data is increasingly a core skillset of corporate counsel; and the application of “best practices” to legal holds and records management paramount in driving the imperative to manage ballooning litigation cost.

“In Asia, the unique challenges arising from being new to electronic discovery means that legal professionals, both in-house and in practice, find themselves on a steep learning curve” says Bryan, “we have been seeing an increased demand for legal professionals with e-discovery expertise to help corporations navigate tricky e-discovery issues and manage compliance risk“.

Additionally, the embrace of emergent internet technology by companies means that their legal departments continually grapple with information risk from new sources, such as Web 2.0 tools, social media, cloud computing, unified communication and virtualization. These technologies present e-Discovery challenges that will keep in-house legal professionals (and their panel law firms) on their toes!

continued @  Electronic Litigation Challenges for Corporate Counsel: An Interview with Bryan Ghows.

RAND Report Explores Conflict Between European Data Privacy Laws and… — WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., Dec. 7, 2010 /PRNewswire/ –

FTI Technology LLC, the e-discovery business segment of global advisory firm FTI Consulting, Inc. (NYSE: FCN), today announced the availability of a RAND Europe report entitled “E-Discovery and Legal Frameworks Governing Privacy and Data Protection in European Countries.” The complimentary report, which is available for download at the FTI Technology site, provides guidance on a common challenge for multinational organizations: preserving EU citizens’ right to privacy versus the duty to produce relevant emails and documents for legal or regulatory investigations.

“Whether for the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), the UK Bribery Act or a multinational legal matter, many corporations struggle with how to collect and produce relevant information in a safe and defensible manner,” said Joe Looby, senior managing director practicing in the FTI Technology business segment. “While multinational e-discovery is complex, this RAND Europe report shows that there are reasonable processes that legal teams can follow.”

Incorporating guidelines from the European Directive’s Article 29 Working Party, the Sedona Conference, as well as national data privacy experts from five European countries, the RAND report is a practical review of data privacy requirements and processes that will help corporations and law firms legally collect, process, review and transfer data for litigation, regulatory requests or investigations in line with European values. For those involved with multinational e-discovery, the report includes a checklist of recommended actions, as well as an appendix of country-specific requirements for France, Germany, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

via RAND Report Explores Conflict Between European Data Privacy Laws and… — WEST PALM BEACH, Fla., Dec. 7, 2010 /PRNewswire/ –.

Why Managing E-mail Matters – Forbes.com

Companies across the U.S., U.K., continental Europe and Asia are recognizing that e-discovery now entails more than simply responding to litigation. Increasingly, corporations are viewing e-discovery as a standard business process used by compliance, legal, risk, HR and other groups. Without this business process in place, e-discovery can become exceedingly complicated–even more so for multi-national corporations navigating regulatory and legislative nuances across geographical and jurisdictional borders. Furthermore, shareholder value is at risk. If we total the billions lost in shareholder value from these types of cases, it equates to a global phenomenon impacting nearly every investment fund, shareholder, and developed economy.

The nuances of how different countries approach litigation and regulatory investigations help set the tone for e-discovery. In countries like Brazil, India, Russia and China, large-scale investigations are often spearheaded based on suspected violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). For example, Satyam Computer Services’ ( SAY – news – people ) founder and former chief was indicted for skimming huge amounts of cash from the company. These FCPA violations resulted in Satyam’s eight-year ban from doing business with the World Bank.

via Why Managing E-mail Matters – Forbes.com.

Does DIY ediscovery measure up? |Image & Data Manager

David McGrath explores the challenges of insourcing ediscovery. When does it make sense to leave it to the experts and what are the tools, processes and resources you need to be aware of?

A thriving and nuanced ediscovery industry exists in Australia, with many of our providers having been around for some time and quite rightly entitled to consider themselves world class.

There is in fact a growing trend towards insourcing some aspects of ediscovery. The 2009 Litigation Trends Survey by international law firm Fulbright & Jaworski LLP found that around one half of their respondents insourced an aspect of ediscovery.

We all know ediscovery can be expensive so wouldn’t it make sense to do at least some of it yourself? You might be able to save some money whilst creating and retaining valuable knowledge about your processes and data assets for later reuse. Moreover, it can be an important driver for an improved information management strategy.

Obviously, the largest driver for insourcing ediscovery functions is your litigation profile. You can think of your litigation profile in terms of how often you anticipate being involved in litigation, or regulatory investigations, and what risk that poses to the organisation.

Some industries such as construction, pharmaceutical, financial services tend to have higher litigation profiles than others. A good initial test of course is the size of your current litigation spend.

via Image & Data Manager.

Is Your Compliance Department Real and Alive? | Thomas Fox – JDSupra

Speaking at the IQPC 2010 Internal and Regulatory Investigations in Oil and Gas Conference, Nick Lumley, General Counsel of Centrica Storage, discussed how Centrica is using compliance policies and procedures as a business enabler. As a relatively new corporate entity, Centrica was able to create its own Code of Conduct and compliance culture within the past decade. Lumley emphasized that neither he nor the Company wanted a checklist culture of compliance but one that was vibrant within the Company.

One of the key items stressed by Lumley to make compliance vibrant was not only that a culture of compliance had to be real and alive within a company, but that the Compliance Department itself must also be real and alive. By this he meant that the Compliance Department had to be not only flesh and blood people that the rest of the company could relate to but the department had to be an active part of the company’s business.

via Is Your Compliance Department Real and Alive? | Thomas Fox – JDSupra.

UK Firms Block Facebook Over Legal Fears

Over 50 percent of UK organisations block access to social media sites, because Facebook data could be required in legal eDisclosure requests

New research from an international law firm has shown that the majority of UK firms are now blocking access to social media websites such as Facebook, due to concerns that information from these sites is increasingly being demanded for regulatory investigations.

via UK Firms Block Facebook Over Legal Fears – News – eWeekEurope.co.uk.