Additional to my previous reply and as a courtesy to assisting...

Additional to my previous reply and as a courtesy to assisting you in your legal education...here's a little article about civil jury trials in the Australian context. Don't by any means think I support insurers by the way...I loathe them.

Having said that they do raise the tactical issues regarding why a litigant would employ a jury election as a tactical measure against a defendant. You seem to think it somehow is a mark of a strong claim...think again.

As I suggested to you previously you may want to refrain from legal speculation when you have zero understanding of process and...in addition...trial tactics that are designed to favour a party (on either side of the litigation). The point re civil juries was the only point of personal interest your post raised for me. You'll note tfrom the article that Australia has serious limitations on re civil juries with most states not allowing them and the rest only in the most limited of circumstances

Anyway it's all covered in the article. ENJOY...it's ok you can thank me later...

http://www.mondaq.com/australia/x/2...ning the role of the jury in civil litigation

PS...ever wondered why in the US you see those crazy "no win no fee" billboard advertising by legal practitioners topped only by every second TV and radio commercial? You might want to have a look at the retainer documentation closely...it's a scream. Great for lawyers' turnover...maybe not so great for plaintiff's pecuniary outcomes...