Entries are judged and awards are granted by the members of the judging panel assigned to each category.

Judges will be asked to recuse themselves from judging nominations that there may be a conflict or perceived conflict of interest with the nominee. In this instance, scores from other judges will be scaled to ensure fairness.

Member awards

For member awards, judges will be asked to rate each assessment criteria based on the following:

1: Nominee provided little to no evidence connecting the award criteria and their work.
2: Nominee provided partial evidence connecting the award criteria and their work.
3: Nominee provided relevant evidence connecting the award criteria and their work.
4: Nominee provided high level and convincing evidence connecting the award criteria and their work.

There are three criteria for assessment – the criteria are weighted, to ensure the most critical aspect of the assessment is addressed. Each criteria is weighted as follows:

Question 1: 50 per cent
Question 2: 25 per cent
Question 3: 25 per cent

As they assess entries, judges are permitted to amend scores from previously judged entries for consistency. This can be done any time up to the close of the judging period, but once scores have been submitted to the Law Society for collation, they cannot be changed.

Judges are invited to use their specialist industry knowledge to judge the entries but have been cautioned to not ‘fill the gaps’ on incomplete or lacking in evidence submissions.

At the judge’s discretion, a recognition of ‘Highly Commended’ may be awarded in the category in addition, or instead of and award recipient.

The judge’s decision is final.

President's Medal

Judges will assess the nomination based on

• Evidence supplied with the nomination addressing the criteria
• Any interviews conducted with supplied referees and the nominee
• A cross check with the Law Society of NSW Professional Standards Unit to ensure those being considered are fit and proper persons.

The judge’s decision is final.