ABSTRACT Courts are starting to keep data about the numbers of litigants who personally file court documents and appear without counsel. The growth in numbers of unrepresented litigants is aptly described as a phenomenon and can be attributed to various causes. Whether or not it is a ‘problem’ however, is arguable. This article explores the concept of the unrepresented litigant in a strange and unnavigable milieu and the ethical duties of lawyers as officers of the court in that context. Focussing on Australian examples, the primary aim of the article is to highlight the lack of guidance in both codes of ethical conduct and judicial commentary on ethical issues for lawyers faced with an unrepresented opponent. Ethical issues at various stages of the dispute resolution process are discussed, including the complexities involved with unbundled legal services. The author argues that as an officer of the court, counsel should assist the judicial officer and consider the situation through a lens of ethical reasoning, while recognising the dilemma this can pose for lawyers who must respect their duties to their own clients. The article concludes that lawyers must abide by their ethical responsibilities whether or not the opponent has representation, while acknowledging that this may be challenging for a variety of reasons. It also suggests that the absence of any reference to unrepresented litigants in ethical codes of conduct should be addressed.

中文翻译：

---

尊重“无学识”的朋友：职业道德和无代理诉讼人

摘要 法院开始保留有关亲自提交法庭文件并在没有律师的情况下出庭的诉讼当事人数量的数据。无代理诉讼当事人数量的增长被恰当地描述为一种现象，可以归因于各种原因。然而，这是否是一个“问题”是有争议的。本文探讨了在陌生且无法驾驭的环境中无人代理诉讼人的概念，以及在这种情况下律师作为法院官员的道德责任。以澳大利亚为例，本文的主要目的是强调在道德行为准则和司法评论中，对于面对无代理律师的律师在道德问题上缺乏指导。讨论了争议解决过程各个阶段的道德问题，包括非捆绑式法律服务所涉及的复杂性。作者认为，作为法院官员，律师应协助司法官员并通过道德推理的视角考虑情况，同时认识到这可能会给必须尊重其客户职责的律师带来两难境地。文章的结论是，无论对方是否有代理，律师都必须遵守其道德责任，同时承认这可能出于多种原因而具有挑战性。它还建议应解决道德行为准则中未提及无代理诉讼人的问题。虽然认识到这可能会给必须尊重其对客户的职责的律师带来两难境地。文章的结论是，无论对方是否有代理，律师都必须遵守其道德责任，同时承认这可能出于多种原因而具有挑战性。它还建议应解决道德行为准则中未提及无代理诉讼人的问题。虽然认识到这可能会给必须尊重其对客户的职责的律师带来两难境地。文章的结论是，无论对方是否有代理，律师都必须遵守其道德责任，同时承认这可能出于多种原因而具有挑战性。它还建议应解决道德行为准则中未提及无代理诉讼人的问题。