P2P

53 I L T A N E T . O R G A critical component of the overarching records retention and disposition policy is the retention review date calculation and the "event" from which such dates are calculated. Retention review dates may be determined by jurisdiction, practice group, client, matter, even document type. The retention period for matter material may be seven, ten, twenty or a hundred years even. Whilst this should be pinned down, so must the dates from which these retention periods commence. Is it 10 years after the matter closes, or 10 years from when the firm no longer worked with the client, or 10 years after billing activity ceased even if the matter remains open? =You need to make a clear decision on this so that policy has clarity and ensure all content can sit within the policy. Care needs to be taken over exceptions to the standard rules on destruction. Some documents, like wills, trust deeds, etc. clearly need to be kept in perpetuity. Alternately some records may need to be destroyed sooner because of some overriding OCG requirement, or because of something stipulated in the original terms of engagement. There may be especially confidential documents which need to be managed differently, including documents that require additional levels of approval before destruction. Consideration needs to be given to the records that may need to be kept as evidence for longer than standard because there's the possibility of some future action or litigation. One step at a time Step 4 is execution of the policy mandated processes, procedures and controls, which is straightforward – in as much as you just do what's mandated in your policy. Yet it can feel overwhelming, especially at the beginning, when you're dealing with the largest volume of data. It's about taking it one step at a time. In the US the task of offering to return matter materials to the client can be complicated by not being able to find the client anymore. If it's verified that they're no longer around it becomes a matter of tracking down their beneficiaries. Likewise, if the lawyers who handled a matter have left the firm, it's also harder to assess if any litigation might arise. It's also difficult to get senior lawyers to take on the unrewarding task of reviewing long lists of material to ensure the right decisions are being made. That's why it's necessary to pay attention to Step 5 which is getting data destruction decisions over the line. This can be tough because some lawyers are instinctively conservative and would rather keep all data than destroy any. Notwithstanding the firm has to keep its eyes on the prize. The whole exercise is aimed at minimizing data and all your effort will be in vain if the final step isn't taken. It follows that firms should do everything possible to help lawyers with appropriate guidance (hence the importance of an information governance committee and an awareness campaign) and also ensure all the information the lawyer needs at the point of decision making is available and easy to follow. Software can help here by arranging everything in a simple interface so the deciding lawyer can see, for example, that no fees are outstanding, and the date on which all the firm's criteria for a closed matter have been met. The final act is to follow the preordained destruction procedure, which ensures that destruction means destruction: so paper needs to be shredded or pulverized, and electronic files are deleted beyond retrieval or reconstruction. Proceed iteratively Finally, note that when we talk of five steps, it's not necessary to complete them sequentially. Rather firms should proceed iteratively on the basis of doing what they can do. It's true you shouldn't destroy data until you have the policy in place. But you needn't wait for the policy to

• Cover