Vertex Chambers strongly believes that cases should be brought before courts or tribunals only if it would establish or reinforce legal rights. We are a staunch believer of not filing any case that would give clients the so-called “short term” benefit but would be unsuccessful after the substantial hearing is concluded.
To achieve this objective, there is an element of thoroughness that goes into our work. One can, of course, get away by not doing that; but, we, at Vertex Chambers, try to remain absolutely assiduous in case preparation to give our clients the best possible outcome.
The need for thorough preparation of cases or briefs is judicially recognized. In Rodriguez Machado v. Shinseki (2012), United States Court of Appeals, First Circuit, while rejecting an ill-prepared appeal, observed that proper case preparation meant (a) proper presentation of crucial facts; (b) reference to the necessary caselaw; and (c) properly reasoned analysis to support the litigant’s theories.
At Vertex Chambers, we offer a range of services to help firms, advocates, and individuals with merit assessment of any potential claim before courts or tribunals:
(a) draft merit assessment opinions or position papers for bringing an action;
(b) review and analyze trial records, factual assertions and other documents;
(c) assisting trial or appeal strategy;
(d) research and analyze caselaw; and
(e) draft persuasive petitions, affidavits, appellate documents, and written submissions.
Recent work example:
We regularly advise and represent clients in arbitrations touching upon the broad areas of corporate and commercial laws. Some of our recent works include:
Merit assessment opinion to a leading telecommunication service provider on challenging a draft regulatory and licensing guideline for tower sharing;
Merit assessment opinion to a leading telecommunication service provider on challenging the imposition of fine by the regulatory authority;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging the local government tax regime;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging tobacco cultivation control policy;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging VAT notification regarding price approval process for tobacco manufacturers;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging on challenging Health Development Surcharge Management Policy 2017;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging the effect of VAT imposition on civil aviation authority of Bangladesh;
Merit assessment opinion for challenging the interpretation of characterisation of redeemable preference shares by the regulatory authority in connection with a transaction in RMG sector;
Merit assessment opinion on challenging dividend taxation in a leading power generation company;
Merit assessment opinion on prospect of appeal before the High Court Division arising out of a property dispute; and
Merit assessment opinion for a leading non-governmental organisation in connection with several land related cases pending before the lower court, Land Survey Tribunal and High Court Division.