Written by When Transparency Task Force founder Andy Agathangelou opened last Tuesday’s forum with the words, “It’s a David versus Goliath battle,” the pause that followed said it all. For most litigants in person (LIPs) — ordinary citizens fighting cases without professional representation — that description is more than metaphor. It’s a lived reality.
The session brought together campaigners, whistleblowers, former professionals, and members of the public from across the UK, Ireland, and Canada. Each had one thing in common: an encounter with a justice system that often seems designed for lawyers, not for citizens.
But the conversation wasn’t about resignation. It was about strategy, solidarity, and technology — practical ways to help people stand their ground in a system stacked against them.
The reality of being a litigant in person
Representing yourself is daunting. The procedures are complex, the rules unforgiving, and the emotional toll immense. Most self-represented claimants begin with a sense of moral clarity — I’m right, so I’ll be heard — only to find that truth alone is not enough.
The courts and tribunals operate on process, not principle. Success depends on knowing the rules, meeting deadlines, and presenting evidence in the correct form. Fail on any of those points and even the strongest claim can collapse.
As I said during the session, “People think they’re fighting a legal argument. In reality, they’re fighting procedure. Your first defence must be built on solid procedural discipline.”
Three procedural traps — and how to avoid them
1. Bundle Chaos – Judges lose confidence when bundles are inconsistent, unnumbered, or incomplete.
Solution: Keep one master version. Paginate every page, include a clear index and a running chronology at the front. Never file multiple or conflicting copies.
2. Disclosure Overload – Opponents often weaponise disclosure by demanding vast amounts of paperwork or by dumping evidence late.
Solution: Keep an issue-by-issue disclosure log and propose phased disclosure. If a request is too broad, ask for limits by date range or subject matter.
3. Cost and Deposit Threats – Respondents frequently use cost warnings or deposit order applications to intimidate.
Solution: Respond calmly and in writing. Argue proportionality. Provide means evidence if required, and propose a nominal or staged deposit. Never panic — these are tactical moves, not moral judgments.
Building procedural strength
Being a LIP is about preparation, not improvisation. Here’s what I tell clients and community members:
- Keep a Dates Ledger. Record every order, direction, and deadline. After each hearing, email a brief summary of what was agreed and invite correction — it keeps the record clean.
- Anchor your case early. Draft a List of Issues linking each allegation to its legal basis and supporting evidence. It keeps submissions focused.
- Maintain a Master Chronology. It’s your map. Update it whenever a new event or document arises. Judges read chronologies first — make it count.
- Confirm everything in writing. Courts respect clarity. A short, neutral confirmation email after each stage demonstrates organisation and reliability.
These simple habits change outcomes. Procedure is not bureaucracy; it’s how you prove credibility — and how you make the system work for you.
Using AI intelligently — your new ally, not your lawyer
During the session, I introduced a prototype AI tool my team at Legal Lens is developing for litigants in person. It uses retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) to:
- analyse uploaded case documents,
- flag procedural risks (such as missing evidence, deadlines, or deposit-order exposure),
- generate next-step templates (letters, disclosure requests, or case-management proposals), and
- maintain a dates ledger and evidence matrix automatically.
The aim isn’t to replace human judgment — it’s to remove the chaos that destroys confidence. It’s designed to make legal procedure manageable, traceable, and strategic.
Participants shared their own experiences using ChatGPT and other AI tools for case preparation. Retired journalist Nick Rogers called it “astonishing — a total game-changer.” Others described using AI to summarise witness statements, build timelines, and check procedural rules.
Still, caution is vital. AI can hallucinate case law or misquote judgments. Always verify anything it produces against legislation.gov.uk, judiciary.uk, or official tribunal guidance. If a citation doesn’t exist, delete it.
Think of AI as a junior clerk who never sleeps — fast, helpful, but sometimes overconfident.
The emotional and psychological battlefield
Representing yourself isn’t only procedural; it’s psychological. You will face hostility, manipulation, and fatigue. Opposing counsel are trained negotiators — they will test your composure.
I always advise clients to rehearse. Role-play hearings with a friend or mentor. Anticipate difficult questions. Practise concise answers. In court, confidence comes from preparation, not personality.
Majella Rippington, who has navigated Ireland’s courts for years, offered one of the evening’s most memorable reminders: “You don’t go to court for justice — that’s a concept. You go for law. And you must fight for the law with the law.”
Resilience also means perspective. Win or lose, maintaining dignity and integrity matters more than trading blows. As I often say: “You can’t control the judgment, but you can control the record.”
Free and low-cost resources for self-represented parties
- Support Through Court – Emotional and procedural assistance, in person or online.
- LawWorks Clinics – Free legal advice sessions delivered by volunteer solicitors.
- Free Representation Unit (FRU) – May represent claimants in Employment and Social Security Tribunals.
- Advocate (Bar Pro Bono Unit) – Connects litigants to barristers for limited-scope pro bono work.
- Legal Lens Resource Pack – Templates, procedural checklists, and AI-assisted drafting tools to support self-representation.
- Government Sources – Official guidance via legislation.gov.uk, judiciary.uk, and gov.uk/tribunals.
- Case Law Access – The British and Irish Legal Information Institute (BAILII) provides free access to relevant precedents.
Towards a fairer future
By the end of the evening, Andy and I agreed that this should be the first of many sessions — spaces where citizens can exchange knowledge, build confidence, and support one another. The Transparency Task Force has committed to hosting regular forums where experience becomes shared strategy; the next takes place on 6 January, and I’ll be speaking again.
Litigants in person shouldn’t have to choose between silence and insolvency. Technology, collaboration, and persistence are beginning to reshape that choice.
Andy concluded the session with a memorable quote from Abraham Lincoln: “He who represents himself has a fool for a client.” He went on to note, rightly, that in today’s world — where knowledge is no longer confined to institutions — that assertion no longer rings true. The modern litigant in person, equipped with structure, community support, and intelligent tools, is far from a fool. Instead, they stand at the forefront of a quiet, AI-augmented revolution in access to justice.
Disclaimer: This article provides general information and commentary for public interest purposes only. It is not legal advice and should not be relied upon as such. Readers representing themselves should verify all procedural and legal requirements using official sources or seek professional advice where possible. Views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent any organisation or forum mentioned.