When the Rules Are Hidden: Power, Fairness, and the Price of Legal Work
Clients often think they decide what they pay their lawyer — but without multiple tenders based on the same brief, the real cost is hidden. Clean Law’s one-path funding lets clients compare strategies without paying for duplicate work, making costs transparent before they commit.
Sharpcan and the Purpose Problem in Litigation: Why Objectives Shape Outcomes and Costs
A High Court case on tax offers a quiet warning for civil litigants: purpose determines outcomes. If your goal is economic resolution, structural alignment — including two independent lawyers with one-path funding — prevents purpose drift and cost spiral.
When Two Marks Look Similar - Power, Perception, and the Court’s Objective Eye
The 1937 Australian Woollen Mills decision shows how easily perceptions of similarity can drive escalation. The Court required real evidence of likely deception — a reminder that objective assessment matters more than suspicion. Clean Law’s two-lawyer structure keeps those assessments separate from advocacy, reducing misreads and cost spiral.
When Settlement Language Breaks: How an Ambiguous Clause Drove Years of Litigation
The High Court’s Lundbeck decision shows how a single ambiguous settlement clause can drive years of litigation. Structural cost alignment — not drafting habits alone — prevents these risks.