Month: April 2022

HEC has announced LAW GAT test registration dates for the LAW Graduate assessment test 2022. The LAW-GAT will tentatively be held on February 20, 2022. Candidates who have passed Bachelor’s degree in Law or equivalent from a university recognized by HEC/PBC can register themselves online through http://etc.hec.gov.pk Applications can be submitted online at the HEC website. HEC LAE-GAT is compulsory for all LLB graduates before entering the legal profession for practicing law.

The test will consist of Multiple Choice Questions (MCOs). Applicants who have registered through HEC online registration process will download their Roll Number Slip through http://etc.hec.gov.pk a week before the test date. Email/SMS will be sent to registered applicants regarding the test date time, and venue. Candidates are required to provide a valid email/mobile number while filling out the online application form.

A print of Roll Number Slip and original CNIC will be required to enter Test Centre.

Eligibility Criteria for HEC Law GAT 2022

• Persons having passed Bachelor’s degree in Law from a university recognized by HEC and PBC are eligible to apply.

HEC-Law GAT Test Centers

The Test will be conducted in the following Centers:

• Islamabad
• Lahore 
• Karachi
• Sukkur 
• Abbottabad
• Quetta 
• Multan
• Hyderabad
• Turbat
• Bahawalpur
• Peshawar
• Muzaffarabad
• Faisalabad
• Gilgit

Applicants may select any test Centre from the list available in the application form.

Test win only be held on any of the above Centers if a minimum of 100 applicants will select that Centre.

Test Centre once selected will not be changed after registration.

How to Register for HEC Law Graduate Assessment Test GAT 2022

• Please visit the following link: http://etc.hec.gov.pk for online registration.
• In case of any difficulty during online registration, please send an email at etc@hec .gov.pk or visit HEC Secretariat or HEC Regional Centers for guidance
• Application submission comprises two steps: profile completion using the “My Profile” section, and application submission using “Law GAT Test” link on the menu panel in the left-hand sidebar of online portal.
• Only SUBMITTED applications will be considered for LAW-GAT Test and applications in SAVE or
• The INCOMPLETE mode will not be entertained.
• A test fee of Rs. 3000/- is to be deposited Online/ATM in Account No. O 1127900567403

Account Title: Higher Education Commission,

Bank: Habib Bank Limited, Branch Code: 0112.

Bank draft/ Pay Order will not be accepted

• Applicants are required to submit original fee deposit slip/ATM/online transfer through courier at
• Room No. 13-207,2nd Floor, HRD Building, HEC, H-8, Islamabad on or before the last date of registration.
• Please mention your CNIC number at the backside of the deposit slip. 
• The examination is non-transferable non-refundable and
• Deadline for Online Registration February 07, 2022.

Other Requirements/Conditions

• A 50% score is required to pass the Law Graduate Assessment Test (Law-GAT).
• Applicants will have to meet other criteria, if any, as per the Rules and Regulations of PBC.
• Applicants will have a maximum of three chances to clear the Law-GAT test. HEC will conduct the test thrice a year.

A student team has pitched Mouthpiece Law, a legal technology platform that aims to reduce the traditional overhead costs for legal practitioners by as much as 50 per cent, at the Collision 2021 Conference.

The team members include three students from Queen’s Faculty of Law: Avinash Pillay, Mouthpiece Law’s chief operating officer and chief legal engineer; Yoonhyun Cho, chief executive officer and chief legal entrepreneur; and Daniel Moholia, chief information officer. Thabo Magubane from the University of KwaZulu-Natal’s Pietermaritzburg Law School acts as chief technology officer, said the news release.

Collision is a technology conference with participants including e-commerce companies, social media companies, software companies, start-ups, fintech providers, investors and celebrities. The 2021 conference saw more than 38,000 remote participants.

Mouthpiece Law seeks to offer the general public cost-effective solutions to access legal services through reduced overhead costs, to promote access to justice for traditionally marginalized communities, to help legal practitioners earn more revenue via digitization and to assist the legal community in adapting to the shift in legal delivery models to more data-driven methods.

Pillay and Cho, accepted into the Legal Innovation Zone’s Concept Framework Incubation program which is modeled after Ryerson University’s DMZ program, started collaborating as project leads at the Conflict Analytics Lab, which is based at Queen’s Law and at the Smith School of Business. Now, according to Pillay, the team members have been communicating with angel investors and venture capitalists that they met during Collision.

“The legal technology market is growing rapidly as lawyers begin to realize the cost inefficiencies of antiquated billing and case management software,” said Pillay in the news release. “AI is becoming a buzz word in the law, and [venture capitalists] seem to be increasingly driven to find ethical and ethnically diverse start-ups.”

The team is also developing MyLawyerProfile as one of Mouthpiece Law’s products, which is a virtual networking platform for lawyers and law students to share information such as their resumes, case work, billable rates, thought leadership and areas of experience. The platform seeks to promote professional development, to attract new clients and to reduce fatigue and complacency among legal professionals with the use of gamified engagement elements inspired by blockchain technology.

“Our users can earn unique badges based on their work on our platforms, such as rare badges that are limited quantity and serial-number-based to enhance the resume and job prospects of practitioners and law students,” said Cho.

DERA GHAZI KHAN: Rojhan police claim to have recovered a 13-year-old girl from a brothel at Chak Dilbar village, arresting her father who allegedly sold her to criminals and a woman pimp.

The issue was highlighted after a video clip was uploaded on social media in which an unidentified man showed a picture of a 13-year-old girl, saying that she had been sold by her father to criminals running a brothel at Chak Dilbar village of Rojhan tehsil.

The man also appealed to the public to rescue the minor girl from the brothel.

Rojhan Station House Officer (SHO) Muhammad Ishaq said that to confirm the presence of the minor girl at the brothel, he sent an informer to the village who contacted a woman pimp.

The SHO said the informer, posing as a client, asked the woman to bring the girl. He said the woman charged Rs1,500 from the police informer and as soon as she brought the girl, a police team raided the brothel and took her in protective custody, besides arresting the woman.

The SHO said the girl confirmed to the police that her father had sold her to the criminals running the brothel.

Rajanpur District Police Officer Muhammad Afzal told Dawn that the police had also arrested the father of the minor girl and registered a case against the pimp woman and the father of the girl under sections 371A, 371B and the Prevention of Human Trafficking Act 2018.

Written by ABC Legal Services

In response to the world-wide pandemic that is COVID-19, courts around the world have had to adapt to the challenges presented by this unprecedented situation. While a critical transition from traditional court proceedings to an online mode has allowed justice to continue in many jurisdictions, courts and legal professionals are now tasked with the added responsibility of adopting newer technologies in the face of an ever-changing COVID-19 legal landscape.

Legal professionals now find themselves in a position to embrace newer, perhaps unfamiliar technologies to support a growing number of online court services. However challenging these changes may seem, they also present an opportunity to improve upon resources and quality of service offered to clients.

Change can be hard. The justice system and its  pre-pandemic resistance to technology are no exception. Let’s explore how COVID-19 has changed the courts perception and use of technology, while bringing with it a compelling silver-lining.

How Is Technology Impacting The Courts ? 

Leveraging technology is simply easier for some courts than others. While a range of courts look to the newest technologies to operate, others continue to rely on antiquated approaches that have been around for decades due to budgeting constraints and opinions, as well as lack of experience and trust around technology.

On August 30, 2020 the NCBI (National Center for Biotechnology Information) released the findings from a study titled, “Court innovations and access to justice in times of crisis” which examined the courts response to the pandemic on a global scale. The study looked at how this shift was made through the use of technology while maintaining equal and fair access to the courts. The responses were notably varied. Some parts of the U.S. justice system waxed while others waned.

Justice Is Becoming Increasingly Digitized

The 2020 NCBI study continues to express how courts are struggling with the shift to remote styles of working. This shift to digitizing the justice system came fast, and some had to scramble simply to make e-filing (not even a new technology) arrangements. Another aspect is video conferencing applications such as Microsoft Teams, Skype, Zoom, Google Hangouts and WebEx. In the more immediate responses to COVID-19 many judicial systems quickly developed video conferencing facilities as a way of dealing with the hearing process. In reality, some courts have struggled with video conferencing while others have navigated the process with less complications. Issues of data privacy and security have been prevalent as well as issues regarding jury trials. As increasing delays become a growing concern for many courts, (ODR) online dispute resolution has become inevitably popular. ODR makes for a logical alternative during this time, as its use of technology and dispute resolution methods outside of the traditional courtroom provides alternative access to the justice system through widely-accepted methods.

This study makes a very significant and impactful point: ‘Access to justice’ implies a notion that there is universal access to the judicial system without unreasonable delay. There is growing concern among legal experts that a possible ‘case boom’ caused by the pandemic is on the horizon and therefore, courts around the world will need to adapt to the use of technology with speed and effectiveness as well as increase efforts to develop  strategies surrounding access.

Aside from a growing need for the integration of widespread technology use in court services, jurisdictions can reduce unreasonable delays by encouraging the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) as well as ODR in lieu of pursuing traditional methods through the courts.

Perhaps there is a silver lining to all of this; legal tech has seen a transformational shift with the introduction of machine learning, automation, AI and blockchain advancements. This shift provides additional opportunities for legal professionals, law firms and legal departments to implement substantial improvements in regards to efficiency, productivity, security and marketability.

As technology is constantly evolving and the options can seem overwhelming, ABC Legal Services will be holding a free webinar Wednesday, October 28, 2020 at 11:30 a.m. PDT | 2:30 p.m. EDT called, ” A New Day in Court: Technology and the Legal System.” Those interested can register for the free webinar here: https://bit.ly/3iVVlvF

Join ABC Legal Services for an in-depth look at how technology can help legal professionals improve access to the judicial system, as well as increase efficiency and effectiveness of day-to-day operations.

As repercussions of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to unfold in the justice system, the expansion of technology into the legal industry is allowing courts to become an accessible service, rather than simply a place. This webinar will equip legal professionals with insight/best practices to better manage this inevitable shift, while also meeting the growing demands of your clients.

For some U.S. court officials, the pandemic crystallized the benefits of providing tech-based access to courts. But before dedicating any budget to long-term initiatives, a panel of access-to-justice advocates noted such software will fail if users’ needs and user experience aren’t understood.

To be sure, user experience encompasses more than font and design considerations, noted University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law professor of practice and UX4Justice director Sarah Mauet. “UX stands for user experience, not just the design of a single program,” she explained. “It’s understanding all the touch points along the way that led someone to use a product and how that may affect the experience they have with it.”

Mauet and others spoke during an “Operationalizing User Experience Innovation in Utah” panel held virtually on Jan. 20 as part of the Legal Services Corp.’s Innovations in Technology Conference.

The panelists discussed their experience updating Utah’s small claims online dispute resolution platform and they provided general tips for creating useful court tech so it doesn’t languish from underuse.

For example, if a state court doesn’t have access to consultants or focus groups to analyze court users’ needs, they can speak to the court’s help desk staffers to hear what common questions users ask, Mauet said. “It can really help you to see trends where challenges lay,” she noted.

Armed with the help desk’s observations, court administrators can then ask targeted questions to court users and observe their interactions, challenges and “unexpected actions they took” with a court tool, she added.

Mauet stressed the importance of focusing product development on users’ stated needs and observed reactions to the tech. “While the development of justice sector technologies often aim to help reduce traditional access-to-justice barriers … if they aren’t built in response to user needs, they can build additional barriers to access justice and not reduce them,” she said.

In Utah’s case, its statewide online ADR platform was only being used by 26% of eligible defendants. What’s more, of those that leveraged the digital platform, only 50% of cases came to a resolution, said panelist and Arizona School of Law’s Innovation for Justice director Stacy Butler.

While the Utah state court system had previously collected user feedback of its digital ODR platform prior to its launch in 2018, Innovation for Justice was brought in to find out why usership was lagging, Butler said.

After working with the court system to develop key questions they wanted to know from users (such as: Can users understand summons, motions and complaint documents? Can users find the answer form and the information they need to submit?), they created a usability test script, defined success and reached out to potential users of the platform.

During focus groups, Innovation for Justice asked users about their experience using the ODR platform and observed how they accomplished specific tasks, such as finding and filling out an answer form. Mauet noted observing and asking users about their experience is when the “magic” occurs.

Such exercises help to “understand the root causes of what people were experiencing when using the website,” she said.

Mauet and her team eventually suggested Utah shorten some URLs to simplify visiting its website, add QR codes and abbreviate some content on its ODR platform.

For Utah state courts’ self-help center and law library director Nathanael Player, watching the user testing experience provided useful insights, but also highlighted the need to think less like a lawyer when developing access-to-justice tools.

“The scary [takeaway] is thinking about and focusing on comprehensibility over comprehensiveness,” he said. “Giving people digestible chunks of information is scary as someone who is a lawyer. I feel I need to tell people everything to make informed decisions—not telling them everything that could happen is hard.”

However, he noted the experience has emphasized that the “build it and they will come” adage doesn’t hold up well for public-facing court tools.

“One of the big things I internalized from the report [on improving Utah’s ODR tool] is that it doesn’t matter if you put it out there because no one is going to read it or if they do, they aren’t going to understand it,” Player noted.