One case can mean paying for two futures.
Settlement and trial preparation can run at the same time — even if the case later settles.
Ultimate cost — You may know the next estimate without knowing where the total bill will end.
Incentive tension — Under hourly billing, more work generally means more fees, even when everyone acts properly.
Next decision — When the situation changes, how do you decide whether the next legal step is worth funding?
Why the Structure Matters
In ordinary litigation, one law practice may undertake settlement work and courtroom preparation at the same time. Both may be necessary, but the work, fees and next funding decision can be difficult to distinguish.
Clean Law handles settlement and escrow oversight.
A separately retained courtroom lawyer handles court work under a separate costs agreement.
As circumstances change, we help you decide which path to prioritise and whether further staged funding is worthwhile, having regard to likely outcomes, costs and risks.
Each role remains independent.
Funding is organised around one primary path at a time, while necessary protective work may still continue.
When This Structure May Help
Commercial disputes
Business or shareholder conflicts
Building or strata matters
Other civil litigation where cost escalation risk is significant
Nicky Wang
Principal Solicitor, Clean Law
Nicky Wang is a Sydney litigation lawyer and the founder of Clean Law.
Her work focuses on civil litigation, dispute resolution and the way legal costs develop over the course of a dispute.
Understand the structure
See how the two roles, separate costs arrangements and staged funding decisions work—and whether this structure may suit your matter.