Introduction

Legal advertising is allowed in Australia, but strictly controlled, so the professional etiquette of the profession and the interest of the public are preserved. All promotions or marketing by lawyers have to be in accordance with the Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015 (ASCR) and other state or territory legislation that can apply. Some of the requirements include the fact that they have to be correct, not misleading or deceptive, and also conformed to the professional etiquette of the legal profession.

The legal profession has conventionally avoided explicit advertising and plain self-promotion, but the adoption of digital marketing by law firms-which is often driven by legal marketers-brings about a significant paradigm shift. Though some consider digital marketing no more than the modern version of personal referrals that have forever defined the legal profession, for others it’s different and a disruptive force.

Legal advertising in Australia

Legal advertisement in Australia falls within national and local provisions. The ASCR forces lawyers not to mislead facts or pretend that there is something that is not, thus giving unrealistic expectations or inappropriate analogies with other legal practitioners. Specifically:

• Truth: Counselors should not exaggerate claims regarding experience, expertise, or success rates of their claims.
• Confidentality: Advancement Campaigns should respect client confidentiality; therefore, past records or verdicts of a case may not be used as a promotional tool without the consent of the client.
• Fee Advertising: All fee advertising must be specific and transparent so that it doesn’t give rise to either misbegotten or unfair comparisons.

Many other states, such as New South Wales and Victoria, therefore maintain similar codes of practice that are in conformity with the provisions of the ASCR, and therefore the country is uniform.

Advertisement Press or Television

In Australia, soliciting through advertisements over print media and television is permitted but under strict regulations to avoid misleading intending clients. Like Singapore, canvassing over door-to-door direct solicitation is not allowed; however, soliciting over print or media is allowed if it actually presents factual contents. The law firms may hence make use of the press or television advertisement in disseminating services offered; they are not to exaggerate claims about success ratios and professional prowess.

The ASCR prohibits advertisements from engaging in “touting,” which is essentially false or misleading promotional content likely to mislead the public concerning the legal profession. Thus, advertisements should focus on the communication of verifiable, objective information about services, rather than appeals to persuasion or emotion.

TV Commercials 

The use of television advertisements is allowed in Australia; however, solicitors are required to ensure that their advertisements do not mislead the public. The short time span available for television advertising means that lawyers must avoid any statements which may lead to misconstruction. Pursuant to the ASCR, a television advertisement may be misleading if it:

• Includes exaggerated claims on competence or success ratios.
• Fail to provide the public with relevant information about the services offered.
• Sets up false hopes for the results of legal issues.

Furthermore, Australian law states that advertisements must not compare prices or services to another firm or indicate other lawyers overcharge for services. TV advertisements should be factual in nature and not afford them any unfair competitive advantages.

Complimentary Advertising in Newspaper

Free publicity through mass media, such as newspapers, is permitted in Australia provided that free publicity is within the bounds of professional ethics. Lawyers are permitted free publicity so long as they maintain proper professional ethics and not promote their legal services beyond necessity. However, similar to Singapore, a lawyer is to be subject to guidelines as to how transparency fees should be handled, how a lawyer’s confidences with clients will be kept secret, and fair comparison with competitors.

This means that the ASCR does not allow ads creating unfounded hopes or legal services that depict lawyers in a way that would reduce their profession’s dignity. Thus, law practices have to ensure that advertisement advertising is strictly within limits set by such provisions.

Filming at Law Practice’s Office Premises

In Australia filming at a law practice office for advertising or media can only be done if lawyers adhere to the duties under the ASCR. At all times, confidentiality must be upheld to ensure no sensitive information of the clients leaks through the film. Like in Singapore, the name of the law firm can be included in advertisements, but only if not displayed in a way that could be deemed as an advertisement or exploitation of the reputation of the firm.

Shooting a law firm for commercials requires doing it in a way that protects client privacy and doesn’t create any kind of ruckus about legal or ethical standards of confidentiality.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Lawful Advertising is allowed in Australia, but it is strictly regulated to ensure that there are practices relevant to ethical standards. The advertisements whether broadcast through television, printed in newspapers or journals, or created online, have to be truthful and must not make false claims. The professional standards laid by the Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules will have to be adhered to. Advertising legal services therefore requires judicious management and retention of the dignity of the profession while communicating necessary and accurate information to the public.

Bibliography

1. Deborah L. Rhode, The Professionalism Problem, 39 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 283 (1998)
2. Legal Practice Board of Western Australia, Advertising for Law Firms: Guidelines for Legal Practitioners (2019). 
3. David Hamer, Legal Advertising and the Professional Responsibility of Lawyers: Considering the Ethical Limits of Promoting Legal Services, 29 Melb. U. L. Rev. 35 (2005).