Blogby Elena Leonardos

How The LPMC Assited Elena To Take Her Firm To The Next Level – And Grow From There

Article published 09 February 2023 by The College of Law – view here

For almost 15 years, Solicitor, Barrister and Business Owner Elena Leonardos has run her own law firm, Adelaide Legal Solutions – promptly resolving complex disputes for her clients.

However, when it came to putting her ‘business hat’ on, Elena welcomed help to boost her brand.

So when South Australia’s regulation rules changed, Elena had two options. She could apply for an exemption, or she could continue to expand her knowledge by completing the Legal Practice Management Course (LPMC).

She made her choice, and her vision for the firm’s future has never looked brighter.

Our thanks to Elena for sharing her story.

Starting my legal career was exhilarating, yet somewhat daunting. There was an expectation that I dive headfirst into serious litigious matters.

Fortunately, I was mentored by one of South Australia’s leading criminal lawyers. So I managed many complex criminal law cases very early in my career.

After three insightful years, and a two-month New York trip where I considered sitting the BAR, I decided to open my own firm back in South Australia.

I opened Adelaide Legal Solutions in 2011 where I predominantly practise family law. But I’m also kept busy with deceased estates, wills, criminal law and commercial dispute resolution.

In 2021, when South Australia’s regulation rules changed, I thought about seeking an exemption from the LPMC. But I never shy away from learning. The law is constantly evolving – so I should, too.

I enrolled in the College’s LPMC, excited by the opportunity to take my firm to the next level.

Building a network – and new business opportunities

I love to learn, but after 11 years working in business – and a Bachelor’s Degree in Business and Economics – I questioned what could be taught that I didn’t already know. Yet I went into the course with an open mind.

With the accelerated nature of the course, I was expecting it to be very content-heavy – with the potential to get dry. Contrary to my initial expectations, I found the content interesting and relevant.

And from the first day, I met all kinds of people – from principals of top-tier international law firms to local sole practitioners about to embark on their business journey. I was fascinated to learn how they ran their practice and their stories of working abroad.

I still keep in touch with the networks I made during the LPMC. I’ve received referrals from them and have sent matters their way when I felt their skillset was more suited to the client.

After putting our skills to the test during the course, we remain confident in each other’s abilities.

A course that cares

During the LPMC, we had three online assignments. Fortunately, the College was flexible when it came to deadlines.

As a busy full-time single mum, balancing a busy practice, staff, family and extra-curricular activities with study can be challenging – and there were times when I needed extra support from the College.

When I was late submitting an assignment, Graham Jobling – SA’s Executive Director – reached out to discuss the course’s requirements, and to make sure nothing was wrong.

Is everything okay? Do you need more time? How can we help?

I valued the College’s focus on wellbeing and achievable deadlines. The teaching team was always conscious of delivering the content as effectively yet efficiently as possible – because they understood time is a limited resource for lawyers.

And I’m glad they did, because the course content was invaluable to me and my business.

Analysing practice profitability

As a lawyer and business owner, learning on the job is part of the job. Even after 15 years, I’m still growing and aiming higher.

And the LPMC helped me achieve more of my goals.

During the course, I gained a range of alternative best-practice standards and strategies. As a result, I’ve made improvements to my business model. And the improvement in efficiency for my business and my clients is undeniable.

There was a focus on data analysis, which helped me look at the big picture. I can effectively analyse how much a longer lunch or an early finish impacts the growth of my business.

If I were to negate charging 12 minutes a day, for example, the overall cost to me would be profound. Now, I make sure my time in my workday counts.

The College also inspired me to engage a business strategist to analyse Adelaide Legal Solutions – and that alone was impactful and inspiring.

Because who knows? You could be running a practice that’s just a wage to you. Or you could be running a life-changing business that assists the community – while still making a comfortable living.

Mitigating business risks

The LPMC homed in on the day-to-day of running a business. It reminded me that while we strive for efficiencies for clients, rushing to finalise a matter is risky.

Family law is a high-risk category for complaints. Often, lawyers get in trouble because they’re so busy that they rush through matters to save on the client’s bottom line.

But in doing so, they’re just opening themselves up to complaints down the track. They’re also doing their clients a disservice – we’re paid to think, not to run.

Proper and considered advice is so important. I’m here to help my clients make informed decisions.

The LPMC reiterated this – and reminded me how important risk management and constant consideration of your policies and procedures are for taking care of client needs.

Expanding my business – and my impact

I opened Adelaide Legal Solutions to find legal solutions for people who have been entrenched in a dispute, or those who already have an agreement.

To me, the law should be about fairness and resolution – not retribution. I want to resolve matters swiftly but properly so people can get on with their lives with minimal damage.

And thanks to the valuable information I learned throughout the LPMC, I have developed a 12-month plan to expand the business.

I’m on my way to purchasing a second commercial premise. Our offices are comfortable and inviting.

I’m showing people that lawyers aren’t intimidating. We can create real solutions to help them achieve a fair resolution. I’m attracting the client base that I enjoy working with.

So to anyone considering this course: don’t hesitate. Completing your LPMC will expand your vision for your legal career and introduce you to impressive, inspiring professionals along the way.

Case Studiesby Elena Leonardos

The change to ‘equal say’ about to transform court custody battles

“Courts will have to consider a history of family violence as one of seven new criteria when new laws scrap the assumption of “equal shared responsibility” in the most significant change to parenting arrangements since 2006.

What’s in the best interests of a child will become the prime consideration in divorce cases when the controversial Howard-era legal presumption that parents have “equal shared responsibility” is abolished.

The seven factors that judges must consider – which have been simplified from the previous list of 15 – include a child’s safety, their views, the benefit of having relationships with both parents, and the child’s developmental, psychological, emotional and cultural needs.

The factors removed from the list include the lifestyle and background of a child and their parents, the attitude to parenthood demonstrated by each parent, how a change in circumstance would affect the child, and the parents’ prior efforts to spend time with the child.

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus on Tuesday said he would move amendments that aligned with a Senate review – which called for explicitly adding the family violence condition – when the bill reaches the upper house in coming weeks.

But the most significant change will be abolishing the presumption of “equal shared parental responsibility” that separated parents have been entitled to since 2006, when it was introduced by the Howard government to address a historical bias against fathers’ custody.

It meant courts had to start with the presumption each parent gets an equal say in major decisions about their children, and included an associated provision that also required courts to consider time arrangements for children to spend with each parent.

However, the Australian Law Reform Commission found the law was being misinterpreted to mean both parents should see the child for an equal amount of time.

While Australian Institute of Family Studies research says only 3 per cent of separating families have their parenting arrangements determined by a court, the government believes the law serves as a guide to the rest of the families who negotiate their own arrangements.

Family lawyer Jodylee Bartal said Labor’s bill sought to make the first major changes to parenting provisions since the 2006 reforms.

“[The Howard-era reform] was a real shift from the days of the ‘Disneyland dad’, when the non-resident parent would typically see the child fortnightly, on weekends, sometimes in school holidays. It created a bit of a yardstick [around expectations for equal or significant time],” she said.

“These reforms are a positive change for people suffering family violence or coercive control. But for other families, the removal of that yardstick may mean there’s no starting point for engaging in negotiations.”

Bartal said the government’s intention had been to simplify the laws. “But as is often the case, simplifying things adds a bit of uncertainty. There is some concern that removing definitions broadens the potential outcome for families,” she said.

“There’s an increased potential for litigation while the kinks are being ironed out.”

Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus said when introducing the bill earlier this year that the government recognised that “for most children, it is strongly in their best interests to have a loving and nurturing relationship with both parents after separation”.

“The simplified list of best interest factors includes consideration of the benefits to children of having a relationship with each of their parents, where it is safe to do so.

“However, it is necessary to amend the law so it is clear that there is not, nor has there ever been, an entitlement for parents to spend equal time with their child after separation.”

The Senate review also called for stronger safeguards to protect parents from disclosing confidential information, such as personal health records and counselling notes, when there was no value to giving the information.

Greens Senator Larissa Waters, who championed that amendment, said she was glad the government would act to stop subpoenas being weaponised in court.

“Stakeholders have suggested that a blanket ban on access to medical or psychological records is not always helpful, so we support the department’s moves to redraft that section of the bill in a way that ensures [complexities] are taken into account,” she said.

Labor’s bill also introduces a requirement for independent children’s lawyers to meet directly with children, and for the court to consider the right of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander children to maintain their connection to their family, community, culture, country and language.

Senator Tammy Tyrell said she would also support the bill. “It puts the focus back on the children, and the best outcome for them. That can only be a good thing. There’s been a couple of reviews that have recommended these changes, and I’m glad they’re being acted on,” she said.

The bill should sail through the Senate with sufficient crossbench support and come into effect six months after it is passed.”

1 2 3 4 5