HRS §658G-20
When a court can enforce a flawed collaborative law agreement
If a collaborative law agreement has mistakes or a lawyer did not follow certain rules, a court can still decide the parties meant to use collaborative law. This can happen if they signed a record showing that intent and reasonably believed they were in the process. The court may then enforce the agreement, apply lawyer disqualification rules, or apply a privilege.
courts
The statute, as written — A uthority of tribunal in case of noncompliance
(a) If an agreement fails to meet the requirements of section 658G-4, or a lawyer fails to comply with section 658G-14 or 658G-15, a tribunal may nonetheless find that the parties intended to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement if they: (1) Signed a record indicating an intention to enter into a collaborative law participation agreement; and (2) Reasonably believed they were participating in a collaborative law process. (b) If a tribunal makes the findings specified in subsection (a), and the interests of justice require, the tribunal may: (1) E nforce an agreement evidenced by a record resulting from the process in which the parties participated; (2) Apply the disqualification provisions of sections 658G‑5, 658G-6, 658G-9, 658G-10, and 658G-11; and (3) Apply the privilege under section 658G-17 .
Sections this one refers to
§658G-14 What a lawyer must do before you sign a collaborative law agreement
§658G-17 Keeping collaborative law talks private
§658G-4 What a collaborative law agreement must include
LawTrove is not legal advice. The summary above is a computer-generated restatement — the authoritative text is the official version linked above.