In the year 2030, a period of political and institutional upheaval creates a fused profession, being that there is no distinction between barristers and solicitors in New South Wales. Accordingly, the professional rules for barristers and solicitors were combined into one document for all practitioners. Those rules included one rule, designed to increase efficiency and speed, while reducing the cost, of litigation is Rule 26:

26. A legal practitioner is expected to present their client's case in an efficient and legally-understandable form, which confines the issues, which the client might raise, to those that may be stated in a legally-recognizable manner, which cuts through to the core issues in a way which is robust, relevant, and real.

In response to the government's timetable for comments on the proposed law, several organisations seek to push for greater and fairer accommodation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the legal process. One submission to the government notes that the proposed Rule 26 will (continue to) have the effect of suppressing non-biculturally-competent Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples' ability to make claims in court in their own manner and language, thus perpetuating the abduction of indigenous voices by the Australian legal system. To address this, they propose the addition of a new rule, inserted as Rule 27, which serves as an exception to Rule 26:

27. A legal practitioner will not be found liable for any breach of Rule 26 if their client is of Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander descent, and the legal practitioner reasonably suspects that their client has some difficulty with respect to plain English expression.

You are required to make submissions in support of, or opposition or amendment to, the Rule 27 proposal.

[Note: you are not required to make comment about any drafting deficiencies in the proposed rule or propose new wording but should focus on the gravamen (or 'gist') of the proposed rule.]

Answer both parts (A & B)

1. What kinds of professional issues is the Rule 27 proposal trying to address?

Do the combined effect of the proposed rules (Rules 26 & 27) present an effective or appropriate way to address these issues, and, if not, would some other proposal or change to the law be advisable?