INTRA CLIENT COUNSELLING EVALUATION FORM

JUDGE NAME:

TEAM CODE:

Criterion Team
Score and Comments

1. ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE PROFESSIONAL

RELATIONSHIP
(Maximum Score - 10)
Excellent (9-10), Very Good (7-8), Good (5-6), Satisfactory
(3-4), Poor (1-2)
Creating a good working atmosphere for the session
Orienting the client to the special nature of a lawyer-client
relationship
[Discussion of Confidentiality, Rights & Obligations, etc.]
Defining the contours of engagement
[Discussion about Structure of Session, Future Sessions, Fees,
etc.]

2. OBTAINING INFORMATION
(Maximum Score - 15)
Excellent (13-15), Very Good (10-12), Good (7-9),
Satisfactory (4-6), Poor (1-3)
Eliciting relevant information from the client [Legal & Non-
Legal]
Manner of eliciting and managing sensitive information/details
Understanding the feelings of the client, as intertwined with facts
Active Listening on the part of the Lawyers
Developing a complete and reliable understanding of the facts

3. LEARNING THE CLIENT’S GOALS, EXPECTATIONS &

NEEDS
(Maximum Score - 10)
Excellent (9-10), Very Good (7-8), Good (5-6), Satisfactory
(3-4), Poor (1-2)
Understanding the Client’s Needs [Reasons behind Goals]
Understanding the Client’s Goals & Initial Expectations
[Outcomes]
Developing/Restating/Modifying Goals and Initial Expectations,
with the
input of the Client, as necessary
 4. PROBLEM ANALYSIS AND ADVICE
(Maximum Score - 15)
Excellent (13-15), Very Good (10-12), Good (7-9),
Satisfactory (4-6), Poor (1-3)
Brief Description/Restatement of the Problem
Creative Analysis of the Problem [Legal & Non-Legal
Perspectives]
Identification/Formulation of Issues [Legal & Non-Legal]
Brief discussion of Legal Position
Accuracy of Legal Analysis
Discussing interface of legal and non-legal issues
Appropriateness of Legal Advice
[Is it consistent with the achievement of the Client’s Goals?]
It is clarified that lawyers are to analyse the legal position and
tender advice to the client, referring to the laws prevailing in the
country of their residence.

5. DEVELOPING REASONED COURSES OF ACTION (OPTIONS)

AND ASSISTING THE CLIENT TO MAKE AN INFORMED
CHOICE
(Maximum Score - 15)
Excellent (13-15), Very Good (10-12), Good (7-9),
Satisfactory (4-6), Poor (1-3)
Development of Effective & Feasible Options [Legal & Non-
Legal]
Whether Courses of Action address Client’s Needs, Goals &
Expectations?
Balancing Legal & Emotional Needs of the Client
Helping the Client understand the Appropriateness of Possible
Solutions, in light of Goals
Assisting the Client in making an Informed Choice, taking into
account Legal, Social, Economic & Psychological Consequences

6. EFFECTIVELY CONCLUDING THE INTERVIEW

(Maximum Score – 5)
Excellent (5), Very Good (4), Good (3), Satisfactory (2),
Poor (1)
Effective & Skilful Conclusion of the Interview
Whether the Client left with a sense of Confidence in the Lawyers?
Whether the Client left feeling appropriately reassured?
Whether the Client left with a clear sense of what to expect next?
Whether the Client left with a clear sense of Mutual Obligations
to follow?
 7. TEAMWORK
(Maximum Score – 10)
Excellent (9-10), Very Good (7-8), Good (5-6), Satisfactory
(3-4), Poor (1-2)
Appropriate Balance of Participation
Was there was a discernible role division within the team?
Did the Lawyers display Mutual understanding, Good
Coordination & Flexibility in managing the Client?
Did the Lawyers work well together, as a team?

8. MORAL & ETHICAL ISSUES

(Maximum Score – 10)
Excellent (9-10), Very Good (7-8), Good (5-6), Satisfactory
(3-4), Poor (1-2)
Did the Lawyers recognize/identify the moral and ethical issues?
Dealing with moral/ethical issues professionally, and without
judgment
Did the Lawyers take into account rules on professional
standards?
Did the Lawyers propose unethical/immoral tactics or methods?
Participants have been advised that they must keep in mind professional
rules of ethics and conduct as applicable to lawyers, and act accordingly
during the round.
It has been clarified that that all participants, regardless of their country of
residence, shall be deemed to be subject to professional rules of ethics and
conduct as issued by the Bar Council of India under the Advocates Act,
1961.

9. POST ROUND ANALYSIS

(Maximum Score – 10)
Excellent (9-10), Very Good (7-8), Good (5-6), Satisfactory
(3-4), Poor (1-2)
Detailed Discussion of Legal Questions
[Possible Arguments & Counter Arguments]
[With reference to applicable statute/authority, if any]
Potential & Pitfalls of Strategy Proposed
Acknowledging Strengths & Limitations of
Interviewing/Counselling Skills
Detailed Discussion of Non-Legal Issues
Overview of Session

TOTAL (OUT OF 100)

SIGNATURE:
Please Note: The total scores in the criterion 1, 2, 4, 5, and 9 will be used for tie-breaking for teams.