"I think I spent about a quarter of a million dollars on my own legal fees. My ex-partner would have spent a similar amount. And I don’t think that’s an unusual story."
Katrina Smithson is speaking by phone from Sydney where she now lives. She is reflecting on the legal system in New Zealand where she grew up and worked for many years.
"I went in to the whole process quite blind," Smithson says.
"I went to see a lawyer straight away. You get swept up in this. You can end up paying for two lawyers to have an intellectual battle with each other."
Smithson, who has just published a layperson’s guide to using the Family Court, says some legal information is available from sources such as the Ministry of Justice website.
"But to understand that in plain English . . . and for people to actually visualise their way through . . . can be quite hard."
She is saying much the same thing as a new report by University of Otago law lecturer and researcher Dr Bridgette Toy-Cronin.
Toy-Cronin, who researches barriers to the justice system, says most New Zealanders cannot afford a lawyer and do not qualify for legal aid, leaving them unable to access justice.
The report Toy-Cronin has co-authored, "Online Legal Information Self-Help in Aotearoa: An agenda for action", published just before Christmas, says there is a widening gap in access to justice in New Zealand and the need to address it is "acute".
"The need . . . is particularly grave here, given the nation’s justice gap," Toy-Cronin says.
"In a 2017 study, 63% of people had a legal problem, [only 32% were able to access help] and nearly half experienced hardship as a result."
The result is laws on the books that cannot be used in the real world because they cannot be accessed and mobilised by those who most need them.
"You end up with people who have some form of deprivation being unable to access their legal rights, creating an inequality in society."
The idea that the legal system can be confusing and difficult to access is backed up by Manukau District Court judge Alan Goodwin. Goodwin has written the foreword to Smithson’s The New Zealand Family Court Survival Guide, which is being released on Monday.
In the foreword, Goodwin says court proceedings are often difficult, challenging and emotionally draining.
"By their nature they require engagement in a process that can be easily misunderstood and appear intimidating in its complexity," the judge acknowledges.
"It is, for most, an alien environment; lawyers and judges intuitively understand it, but others are left short on clarity."
"Without such information there is unmet legal need, which reduces the strength of our democracy and leads to negative social impacts,” Toy-Cronin says.
“In this landscape, it is vital that for those who can use online resources there is ready access to accurate and comprehensible legal information that explains legal rights, responsibilities and procedure, and which, most importantly, helps them take action."
Her report points to an international movement doing just that — Online Legal Information and Self-Help (Olish) — and urges New Zealand to get on board.
She describes Olish, which has gained momentum during the past decade, as a “potentially powerful tool”.
“It can improve access to justice by making information and tools more accessible, effective, and empowering. Along with providing efficient and convenient information and self-help, it reduces pressure on in-person services."
Most of the countries New Zealand compares itself with are further down the Olish road than we are, particularly in certain pockets of those nations. But Toy-Cronin says while this country might lack the financial resources of some, our small size should make a nationwide collaborative effort quite attainable.
She cites overseas Olish initiatives such as Steps to Justice, in Ontario, Canada, and the United States-based Legal Help FAQ.
Steps to Justice was developed by an Ontario community law organisation in partnership with state courts, Ontario’s law society, activist groups and the Ministry of the Attorney-general. It evolved from a website providing legal rights information to become a more action-based site that includes practical tools such as checklists, guided pathways and self-help guides, as well as referral information for legal and social services.
During the 12 months to mid-2019, Steps to Justice, which has 15,000 pages of content covering 14 legal areas, had 2.8 million visits and 5.3 million page views.
Legal Help FAQ emerged last year in response to increased confusion over US rent and eviction laws during the Covid-19 pandemic. It is a website that enables people in the US to type in their location and be directed to applicable information for their state, which they can then use to address their situation.
"In seeking to narrow the justice gap, many jurisdictions have tried to extend the reach of legal assistance programmes, improve fragmented and daunting court systems and, with the knowledge that not all of this is possible, equip people to deal with issues themselves," she says.
"The challenge has been to bring these strands together at the place where people increasingly seek help for legal problems—on the small screen of a device."
New Zealand does already have some online legal information and some online legal self-help advice, Toy-Cronin says.
Community Law Centres and the Citizens Advice Bureaux provide good-quality information on a broad range of topics, "despite both organisations having limited resource for the task".
The New Zealand Legal Information Institute is an important source of free, online access to case law.
Various government departments provide "voluminous legal information"on their various websites.
But the need for government sites to provide comprehensive information runs the risk of overwhelming users and there are links, overlaps and gaps that can require a goose-chase to find the necessary information.
Toy-Cronin’s conclusion is that more Olish is needed — and needed in a more accessible and usable form.
"While there is a good base of Olish available in Aotearoa, it can be hard to digest and convert into action."
The report calls on the Government, community organisations and social enterprises to provide free Olish that will empower people to know and exercise their legal rights.
It recommends boosting Olish in Aotearoa with a strategy of co-operation and user engagement.
"Any other jurisdiction where this has worked, it has been done through a co-ordinated plan.
"So, what we are looking for is stakeholders to come together to push this to the next level — government, the judiciary, the legal profession, the community organisations, all coming together."
Toy-Cronin is confident her call will be heeded.
"There is definitely a lot of interest in this at the moment. [Everyone] is ready and willing to do something. So we think the timing is right and there is genuine potential to push this forward."
She says there is growing recognition collaboration is needed and that the focus needs to be on what it is like for "the people out there trying to take next steps".
The expectation is that the impetus will come from the Court Strategic Partnership — a joint judiciary and Ministry of Justice group — in which Toy-Cronin has a role.
"I’m optimistic 2021 is going to be a good year for access to justice in New Zealand."
That does not necessarily mean a fully functional, user-friendly Olish ecosystem by the end of the year.
Realistically, Toy-Cronin hopes a set of goals and a pathway with time-bound targets, all agreed to by various stakeholders, will be in place by Christmas.
"It might sound like just talking, but actually if you don’t have a plan you don’t get progress.
"In New Zealand . . . we are so small we should be able to engage in a collaborative way and make a plan together without too many difficulties."
Smithson thinks more and better Olish would have been extremely useful to her.
Instead, she did it the hard way, making lots of costly mistakes.
But she did learn as she went.
"Every time I realised something, I made a note of it," Smithson says.
She found there were lots of things she could have done for herself.
As court hearings dragged on she began doing more.
"I discovered that if you kept track of what you disclosed last time then you can arrange to have all the next set of documents ready.
"You can even do the cover letter your lawyer would normally do . . . and the lawyer only needs to tweak a couple of things."
"If people can become more astute about managing their own cases efficiently then the lawyers and judges will actually have more time to help the people that really need the help."
If Smithson had known at the start all the things she learnt in the process — the sort of information and empowerment she hopes her book will give those using the Family Court, or that Olish could give people faced with all manner of legal questions and situations — she thinks she might have done it all quite differently.
"I might have gone through mediation rather than the legal route.
"Even if I did have to go through the legal system again I reckon I could slash my legal bill by at least a half."
