The short answer is quite a lot with the potential importance of a mobile device containing a “case winning” or “case losing” communication. However, before looking at that aspect I want to talk about the principe of BYOD itself. I should begin with the acronym, which does not mean, as one Sandton lawyer suggested when I was presenting eDiscovery to his firm, “Bring Your Own Drinks”. He was joking of course and we all know that it means Bring Your Own Device. Simply, it is a situation whereby an employee, with the permission of the employer, uses his or her own mobile device or devices for the purposes of the employers business and therefore has access to the company’s applications and information. It is commonplace in SA I have found.
Every country that has adopted eDiscovery into its civil procedure rules has found the support of a Judge or a number of Judges. Indeed in many jurisdictions, members of the judiciary have been drivers or extremely instrumental in the changes. We have not had that luxury or benefit here in SA, relying solely on committees or sub-committees within the Rules Board, which are, at best, part time people who meet infrequently.
There are law firms that have used eDiscovery technology in 2018 for the very first time. There are law firms that, in the past, have chosen not to show interest in eDiscovery technology but, this year, asked for presentations, so that they could “bring ourselves up to date” as one Director of a large law firm told me recently.
TAR, or as some say, predictive coding is arguably the most important feature of eDiscovery technology. It has actually been around since 2010 but become more used as the years (and the technology) have progressed. Now in the UK, US and Ireland, that I know of, there have been decided cases advocating or ordering its use in appropriate cases. I also know it is used in other parts of the world but as yet it has not been used in SA to the best of my knowledge and belief. Perhaps that is not surprising given that we do not even have eDiscovery as part of our Uniform Rules but it does not mean that this fantastic technology cannot be used here right now if the case warrants it.
Many of us would be forgiven if we admitted to being thoroughly fed up, even bored, by all the writings, webinars, podcasts and seminars on GDPR in particular, so I promise that this is not just another one.
Regular readers will know that this blog was recently awarded a spot as the 54th best eDiscovery blog in the world and a recent post in the blog which occupies the No. 1 spot prompted me to write this one for SA.
I could begin and end this post very quickly by simply answering the title question, “Probably very little…. at the moment”. However, that would serve little purpose as these two subjects are extremely relevant to eDiscovery elsewhere in the world and therefore should be noted carefully here in SA by law firms, their clients, and service providers alike.
First and foremost I offer my sincerest gratitude to all who read and support my blog, especially those from within SA. The news that my eDiscovery blog had found 54th place in the world was viewed by well over of 1000 of you. Thank you for reading and for all your comments and support.
There is a lot happening around the world on eDiscovery judging by the volume and variety of information which comes across my desktop on a daily basis, far too much to disseminate and provide worthwhile interest to my target market here in South Africa. However, it is always good to see a snapshot of what is happening elsewhere as a kind of precursor to what may, eventually, happen here.