Which cases may the Director-General support, and on what finding about the consumer's need for litigation?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
We read the dispute mediation outcome and the notice of its content served on the business under the consumer dispute mediation provisions, and, where the business sued first, the court papers showing that redress or mediation proceedings were suspended. The finding of litigation necessity matters because the support depends on it.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading confines support to the two listed event-types: a case where the business did not accept the mediation content it was notified of, or a case where the business sued first and redress or mediation proceedings were suspended; on that basis, and where litigation is found necessary for the consumer's redress, the Director-General may support the consumer's case through a commissioned lawyer's representation or drafting assistance.
Another reading stresses the discretionary wording: the provision says the Director-General 'may' support only where the necessity of litigation 'is recognised', and it does not say who makes that recognition, on what criteria, or whether the consumer must apply, so the categories alone do not entitle a consumer to support.
Your judgment
What in a file would show that the necessity of litigation was recognised, and at whose initiative?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to add or remove a covered case type or to state who finds litigation necessity, or if rules issued with Fair Trade Commission approval define that finding.