Model a percentage-based legal costs order against the funding alternatives
Key facts
- Human involvement
- RedLawyer-led
- How AI is used
- From the claim value estimates, the budget and the funding terms on offer, calculate the return to class members under each structure the lawyer specifies (a percentage-based legal costs order at the rates the lawyer sets, third-party funding at the offered commission, and an unfunded or hourly-rate scenario) across the outcome range, and tabulate the results with every input cited. The tool writes nothing in the application or submissions.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer decides whether the forum permits a percentage-based legal costs order at all, which rate to propose and why, what security and adverse costs arrangements go with it, and prepares the application, evidence and submissions.
- Written for / version
- US
Open a jurisdiction version of this task to see which instruments apply: US
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Supporting preparation only. From the claim value estimates, the budget and the funding terms on offer, calculate the return to class members under each structure the lawyer specifies (a percentage-based legal costs order at the rates the lawyer sets, third-party funding at the offered commission, and an unfunded or hourly-rate scenario) across the outcome range, and tabulate the results with every input cited. The tool writes nothing in the application or submissions. The tool writes nothing into the document. Substantive advice, judgement and any restricted content remain with the responsible human. |
| Lawyer | Perform the substantive analysis and decisions. Independently check any permitted supporting work and approve the exact output for its intended use. |
Checklist
- Confirm the forum before modelling a percentage-based legal fee.
- Check every input against its source: the budget, the funding offer and the lawyer’s outcome range.
- Confirm the scenarios are the ones the lawyer specified and none was added by the tool.
Forms and precedents for this task
| Form or precedent | Kind | AI use | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Group costs order: comparison note before a Victorian s 33ZDA application | Memo | AI use Red | Note for a proposed Supreme Court of Victoria group costs order: the statutory test, what the order does to adverse costs and security, and the practice note's timing and scope. |
Signed-in accounts can read the full text of each one. All precedents.
Sources
- Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic) s 33ZDA — Group costs orders · 2026-10-18
- Supreme Court of Victoria — SC Gen 10 Conduct of Group Proceedings (Class Actions) · 2026-10-18
- Allens — High Court clarifies limits on class action Common Fund Orders (Kain v R&B Investments Pty Ltd, August 2025) · 2026-10-18
These are suggested working checks. Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts; the checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.