Can I initiate a civil lawsuit in order to get the answer to a legal hypothetical?
<p>Suppose that I and a friend of mine are interested in resolving a particular legal hypothetical within the realm of civil law. The exact details are not important here, but no party of the hypothetical has a liability except to each other -- say, it's a breach of contract between the two parties, or a copyright violation.</p>
<p>Suppose then that my friend and I actually set up the hypothetical in real life -- we enter the contract, and then one of us violates the contract in exactly the way we discussed. The other one of us starts a lawsuit, we each get a lawyer, etc. Neither of us reveals that this case was deliberately set up by us to answer the question, at least not until such a question is asked directly.</p>
<p>To which stage of the judicial process would such a case go? Could it go to trial? My intuition tells me that if it becomes known that we have colluded in this manner, the case will be thrown out for lacking consideration. Thus, it will stop at or near the discovery process, as it will become clear that no damages have been incurred by either of us.</p>
<p>This is related to <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/50820/35358">How can we resolve a bet on a question of law?</a> -- the difference is that here, we have created the material dispute to go to court about. It is also related to <a href="https://law.stackexchange.com/q/13415/35358">Can a contract to kill help someone avoid murder charges?</a> but in that case there is criminal liability involved, and criminal cases have the prosecution represent the interests of the state.</p>

<p>It isn't that uncommon to do something similar to this, which is called a &quot;<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Test_case_(law)" rel="nofollow noreferrer">test case</a>&quot;. One of the more familiar examples of this kind of litigation conduct is the case of <em>Plessy v. Ferguson</em>.</p>
<p>There have been test cases, for example, that involved important questions of E.U. jurisdiction in civil law countries as well.</p>

<h2>Probably Not</h2>
<p><a href="/questions/tagged/australia" class="post-tag" title="show questions tagged &#39;australia&#39;" rel="tag">australia</a></p>
<p>From the <a href="http://www5.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/ucpr2005305/s13.4.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 13.4</a></p>
<blockquote>
<p>(1) If in any proceedings it appears to the court that in relation to the proceedings generally or in relation to any claim for relief in the proceedings--</p>
<p>(a) the proceedings are frivolous or vexatious, or</p>
<p>(b) no reasonable cause of action is disclosed, or</p>
<p>(c) the proceedings are an abuse of the process of the court,</p>
<p>the court may order that the proceedings be dismissed generally or in relation to that claim.</p>
</blockquote>

civil-law hypothetical conflict-of-interest