CAN THE LEOPARD CHANGE HIS SPOTS REFLECTIONS ON THE COLLABORATIVE LAW REVOLUTION AND COLLABORATIVE ADVOCACY
Much has been written about the social contribution of the ADR movement, and the many and diverse ways to implement it. This article focuses on collaborative law, one of the newer methods adopted by this movement, and observes that the full impact and implications of this movement have not yet been explored. One of the compelling implications discussed in this article is the collaborative law revolution. This article presents both the observable and latent aspects of this revolution. According to this article, the main contribution of the revolution is in signaling a change in the design and conceptualization of the role of the attorney in family law practice. The reworking of the role of the attorney, which at first glance might seem to be a secondary and less consequential outcome of the process of alternate dispute resolution, may constitute a milestone on the way to a new era in the definition of the legal profession, and therefore represent a valuable contribution by the ADR movement to the evolving legal world. In the second part of the article, we will present an informed critique of collaborative law, along with individual attempts to put it into practice. Additionally, this part of the article proposes the 'principled bargaining' model of Fisher and Ury as an attempt to deal with this criticism comprehensively and as a basis of theoretical conceptual inspiration for the implementation of the practice of the collaborative law process, where the existing ethics legislation is silent. Ph.D. (Law, Direct Doctoral Track) 2003, L.L.B (law) 1996, Bar Ilan University; Assistant Professor, Sha'arei Mishpat Law College. My thanks to Perez Segal, Benjamin Shmueli, Susan Zaidel and all others with whom I have discussed this article, for their enlightening comments.