Can AI Change The Legal Profession Forever?

By: East Care February 6, 2025

Trust me I’m a legal AI: Can the legal profession close the ‘trust gap’ with Gen AI?

At least one federal judicial district has forbidden almost any use of AI. For more insights on AI lawyers, join the Canadian Legal Summit, an innovative new event by Canadian Lawyer, launching in October 2025. In 2025, AI is still developing and is improving all the time but is not the mature service that can be totally relied upon. There is the possibility that if you are using two differing AI tools, inputting the same question into both may result in differing answers, neither of which may be correct. AI’s impact is most visible in functions that are traditionally time-consuming, resource-heavy and susceptible to human error.

Access Legal

• So, for a mid-sized firm reviewing 5,000 invoices annually, AI could slash labor costs from $21,350 (human reviewers) to $0.15 (AI systems).
• Whilst now it may not be fully embracing artificial intelligence (AI), its presence can now not be ignored by the profession.
• This often involves engaging professional review, analytics, coding and eDiscovery providers, and many firms have embedded specialist teams to meet this client need.
• “We are knee-deep in testing Gen AI tools,” said Peter Geovanes, chief innovation and AI officer at McGuire Woods.
• Concerns around algorithmic transparency, data bias and client confidentiality all must be addressed.

These include contract analysis, legal research and predictive modelling. Law schools must become centres of innovation, equipping students not only to work with AI but to lead its ethical and responsible implementation in the legal profession. “However, in some instances, these laws need to be reviewed to ensure they are fit for purpose given the incremental or novel risks arising from AI adoption.

Law Schools Are Quietly Changing DEI Messaging. What Does That Mean for Big Law’s Future Talent Pipeline?

One attributed to bogus authors an article he himself had written, but he didn’t catch the mistake until it was pointed out by the plaintiffs. Hancock, a well-respected expert in the social harms of AI-generated deepfakes — photos, videos and recordings that seem to be the real thing but are convincingly fabricated — submitted a declaration that Ellison duly filed in court. In nearly half the cases, the guilty parties are pro-se litigants — that is, people pursuing a case without a lawyer. Those litigants generally have been treated leniently by judges who recognize their inexperience; they seldom are fined, though their cases may be dismissed.

• These guidelines by the CBA can be used in addition to the white papers issued by the Law Societies.
• Other legal organizations also pattern their own guidelines from these issuances.
• These include contract analysis, legal research and predictive modelling.
• But lawyers can hardly be unaware of the pitfalls for their own profession in failing to monitor bots’ outputs.
• Among firms already using AI, the most commonly reported benefit was faster legal research (53%), followed by improved marketing ideas (32%) and reduced workloads (26%).

Introducing your Newsfeed

The global legal AI market was valued at $1.45 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.3% from 2025 to 2030. The new rule of court and accompanying guidance give courts the choice of whether to use generative AI. With an estimated 300 million weekly users of chatbots such as ChatGPT, it is important to be aware of the risks and rewards of using AI in the workplace. However, these guidelines are expected to change every now and then, especially when mirrored with the fast-paced development of generative AI. Law practices do not want to be in a situation where their competitors are utilising AI which making their offering more efficient and cost effective. Soledad Atienza does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

As Big Law Becomes ‘More Capital Intensive,’ Law Firms Use Wide Range of Partner Contribution Plans

The future of legal education – and indeed the legal profession itself – depends on how well this balance is achieved. “The acceptance of predictive coding or Technology Assisted Review (TAR) has grown and has accelerated to coincide with the exponential growth of data. The main purpose of this technology is to find the most relevant material efficiently and to keep legal costs to a minimum. Australia has generally accepted and adopted the benefits of TAR in litigation. This often involves engaging professional review, analytics, coding and eDiscovery providers, and many firms have embedded specialist teams to meet this client need.

As AI adoption accelerates, regulatory frameworks are evolving to address the unique challenges and opportunities these technologies present. In March 2024, the European Parliament formally adopted the EU Artificial Intelligence Act (“AI Act”), establishing the first comprehensive regulatory framework for AI globally. Shortly after, the United Nations General Assembly unanimously adopted the first global resolution on artificial intelligence, designed to encourage the protection of personal data, risk monitoring and human rights safeguards. Some legal experts say there’s a legitimate role for AI in the law — even to make decisions customarily left to judges. But lawyers can hardly be unaware of the pitfalls for their own profession in failing to monitor bots’ outputs. The future of legal practice in the UK will not be defined by human versus machine, but by how effectively the two are integrated.

To close this trust gap, law firms need to take some basic steps to build their lawyers’ and their clients’ confidence in Legal AI tools — once rolled out, this technology can create amazing new operational efficiencies and open new revenue streams. The first step is to understand what drives trust with the introduction of new technologies. As with any other professions that need that human touch, AI lawyers are just a tool for the legal professionals, or even the public, in understanding the law and simplifying tasks. Unless they can sympathize and interact with clients and face the judge in court, warm-bodied lawyers will still be essential. A global survey by legal software technology developer Litera revealed that 42 per cent of law firms are already using generative AI for work while another 34 per cent are planning to use it in the next 12 months. But the potential downside of using AI was underscored by 35 per cent of respondents saying they were concerned about accuracy, while another 28 per cent voiced security concerns.

It’s peopled by lawyers who appear to be totally oblivious to the technological world they live in. “I can’t believe people haven’t yet cottoned to the thought that AI-generated material is full of errors and fabrications, and therefore every citation in a filing needs to be confirmed,” says UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh. A roster compiled by the French lawyer and data expert Damien Charlotin now numbers 99 cases from federal courts in two dozen states as well as from courts in Europe, Israel, Australia, Canada and South Africa. That’s the issue confronting judges as courthouse filings peppered with serious errors and even outright fabrications — what AI experts term “hallucinations” — continue to be submitted in lawsuits.

Claims Futures Conference 2025

World and Middle East business and financial news, Stocks, Currencies, Market Data, Research, Weather and other data. Judges and court staff tend to work long hours, but that doesn’t necessarily make them feel that they have enough time to carry out their duties, according to the report, which was unveiled Thursday. However, areas like courtroom simulation (14%) and ethical decision-making (11%) were seen as less suitable for AI, likely due to their reliance on human judgment and interaction.

This unprecedented rate of adoption underscores the transformative potential that legal professionals see in AI technologies. Judges have been making it clear that they have had it up to here with fabricated quotes, incorrect references to legal decisions and citations to nonexistent precedents generated by AI bots. Bookmark our Events page for future opportunities and spaces for legal professionals, including upcoming discussions on AI lawyers.