Which statement is true about informing the client about litigation alternatives?

• A. The barrister must inform about alternatives to litigation.
• B. The barrister should inform only if the client asks.
• C. The barrister may inform, but not required.
• D. The barrister must inform about alternatives to litigation, unless the client is adequately informed.

Answer: (D)

The main idea is that a barrister has a duty to provide the client with information about viable paths other than going to court, so the client can make an informed choice about how to resolve the dispute. This includes clear discussion of alternatives like mediation, negotiation, or arbitration, along with what each option means in terms of cost, time, likelihood of success, risk, and impact on privacy or ongoing relationships.

The correct statement reflects that obligation: barristers must inform about alternatives to litigation, unless the client already has adequate information to make an informed decision. That “adequately informed” standard recognizes that if the client already has sufficient details from other sources or prior discussions, the barrister isn’t required to duplicate that information. This framework keeps the client empowered to choose the best path while ensuring the barrister provides essential information unless it would be redundant.