Australia’s Right to Disconnect laws give employees — including those in the legal profession — the right to refuse to monitor, read, or respond to work communications outside their ordinary working hours, unless that refusal is unreasonable. These laws, also covered under reforms, took effect for non-small businesses from 26 August 2024, and will apply to small businesses — including boutique law firms — from 26 August 2025.
For law firm partners, principals, and legal teams, understanding what counts as unreasonable after-hours contact is not only a matter of legal compliance but also a strategic decision for client relations and staff wellbeing. Related considerations include how remote work changes availability expectations and the blurring of work-life boundaries.
Key Summary
- Lawyers may refuse after-hours work communications unless the refusal is unreasonable.
- Factors include: reason for contact, method and disruption, compensation, role/seniority, and personal circumstances.
- All modern awards now include a Right to Disconnect clause (since 26 August 2024).
- Disputes should be resolved internally first; the Fair Work Commission (FWC) can make binding orders if needed.
- It is not unlawful to contact legal staff after hours — the focus is on whether refusal is unreasonable.
- Small law firms must comply from 26 August 2025 — use this time to update policies, billing practices, and client protocols.
What Does “Unreasonable” Mean in Practice?
According to the Fair Work, a refusal may be unreasonable depending on:
- Reason for contact: Urgent litigation deadlines or injunctions differ from administrative requests that can wait until the next business day.
- Method and level of disruption: A late-night phone call during family commitments is more intrusive than an email sent for next-day review.
- Compensation arrangements: Senior counsel or solicitors receiving after-hours allowances or on-call rates may be expected to respond.
- Role and responsibility: Partners and special counsel handling sensitive matters may have greater after-hours obligations than junior solicitors.
- Personal circumstances: Parenting, caring duties, or medical needs can make after-hours contact more unreasonable.
- Other relevant matters: Court timetables, client time zones, and contractual obligations.
Clarity around expectations will be critical for compliance and retention. This links closely to what makes law firms appealing to lawyers, as flexibility and respect for personal boundaries are becoming strong recruitment points.
How Lawyers View the Right to Disconnect
The legal profession has long been associated with unpredictable hours, urgent client needs, and a culture of availability. In Law Society Journal, practitioners noted that while the law gives them a formal right to disconnect, cultural change will take time. Junior lawyers may feel pressure to respond after hours to demonstrate commitment, while senior lawyers may struggle to model new boundaries without fearing client dissatisfaction.
Lawyers Weekly highlights that billing models based on high responsiveness could clash with the law’s intent. Firms may need to review client service agreements and educate clients about reasonable communication expectations, especially in corporate and litigation-heavy practices. Partners who fail to adapt risk higher turnover and potential reputational damage.
There is also a generational element — younger lawyers often prioritise work-life balance more strongly, and may actively embrace the right to disconnect as a non-negotiable part of their employment. The shift could also ease some of the psychological strain lawyers face in high-demand roles, improving mental health outcomes across the profession.
Disputes, Protections, and Broader Perspectives
BAL Lawyers advise law firms to proactively create written after-hours protocols — including examples of what is urgent versus non-urgent — and to train all staff on these definitions. This not only prevents disputes but also strengthens a firm’s defence if challenged at the FWC.
South Geldard Lawyers stress that the right to disconnect is now a protected workplace right. If a solicitor reasonably refuses after-hours contact and faces retaliation — such as reduced work allocation, exclusion from cases, or dismissal — this could constitute adverse action, carrying serious penalties under the Fair Work Act.
Dispute resolution should follow a structured approach: attempt resolution internally, document all communications, and only escalate to the FWC if internal measures fail. The FWC can order an employee to stop unreasonably refusing contact or order an employer to cease unreasonable demands — each with enforceable consequences.
For legal practices, the reputational cost of a public FWC dispute may outweigh any short-term gains from pushing after-hours boundaries, making prevention and clear policy the safest path forward.
Conclusion
The 2025 Right to Disconnect is a significant development for the legal sector, reframing what it means to be available for clients. For law firms, success will hinge on balancing client service with solicitor wellbeing. The “reasonableness” test provides flexibility but also requires judgment, transparency, and planning.
Forward-thinking firms are already revising engagement letters, updating staff policies, and preparing training sessions. Those who adapt early can use the change as a recruitment advantage, signalling to prospective hires that they value sustainable work practices. Lawyers who understand and use the right appropriately can protect their mental health while maintaining professional standards.
Disclaimer: This blog is intended as a general overview of the topic and should not be construed as professional legal or medical advice.
