Modularisation in law—our approach at fingolex

Industrialisation of the law with an accompanying at least partial standardisation in the handling of legal cases? For many lawyers, this seems an unnatural approach to our work. Isn't every legal mandate outside of insolvency proceedings an individual case? In general, §2 I German Law about Legal Services (Rechtsdienstleistungsgesetz, RDG) already states this. According to this, legal services are "any activity in specific third-party matters as soon as it requires a legal examination of the individual case".

However, the question for us now is how best to approach them within the individual case that is currently being dealt with. Is the answer to this also to always process everything anew, as it is a new individual case? Hardly, as this consumes valuable resources. There is probably already a greater consensus on this in the legal profession. But shouldn't there also be a certain kind of available market standard within legal advice so that the remaining time can be spent on the tricky issues of the case?

Another discipline with highly qualified experts is already approaching this question differently—medicine. Medicine heavily relies on treatment guidelines (for an explanation, see for example the definition ont he German Health Ministry's website, last accessed on 15.10.2023). These reflect the latest scientific findings, and doctors add their individual wealth of experience and empathy for the individual case.*

Guidelines in law?

How should something like this look in law? At present, what is scientific knowledge in medicine would probably be a mixture of laws, case law and literature. How and by whom would such guidelines be drawn up in practice? There would definitely need to be an overarching body that would take on the task of developing and providing them. Couldn't we generally handle certain parts of our work better in a procedural way, even in law, so that we learn more clearly and rely not just on rough experience, but on the broader knowledge of many great colleagues?

Of course, one difference between medicine and legal advice is that the latter is probably more competitive than medicine. But couldn't that still be the case, even though we could rely on general guidelines derived from collected practice data? Aren't we basically working for the rule of law in the same way that doctors work for people's health? We should also not forget: the disciplines have something in common—we work with people and want to and should develop empathy for the people we work with.

It would therefore probably take a political movement to address the issue more, as well as the possibility of data collection and accessibility. The German government's new data strategy (p. 18, last accessed on 15.10.2023) also refers in this direction, at least for companies in the free market.

But why don't we as the legal profession go further in this direction?

What does this have to do with fingolex?

At fingolex, we are therefore generally in the process of combining modules (i.e. partially standardised content) with top-class individual advice and thus delivering added value to customers faster and better. In doing so, we are trying to take a few steps further in the direction of industrialisation. In combination with the utilisation of digital possibilities, we believe this is the future of the legal market.

If you have any questions or comments about our methodology at fingolex, please do not hesitate to contact us. Whether you want to know how you can benefit from it as a company or are interested in discussing it as a colleague. We are looking forward.