Don’t Let a Bot Be Your Lawyer

“Everything is AI and AI is everything”

But is it?

Today, the advent of AI is transforming almost every profession and while it has become indispensable in our daily lives, we are still far away from when it may be able to match the unique human element of the legal experience.

Living a thousand kilometres away from home, even though ChatGPT may sometimes serve as my late-night companion,

I cannot help but emphasise the apparent dangers involved in relying solely on it for resolving your legal issues, despite the efficiency and cost savings.

While AI may well be able to answer a legal query initially, quickly, and more reasonably, the accuracy of that information is still questionable especially when used by non-lawyers without consulting legal professionals.

While many traditional lawyers may resist and argue that legal work is too sophisticated for AI to handle, the real concern runs deeper: even though AI can sometimes be a useful tool in initial brainstorming, research, analysing large volumes of information, it remains wholly unsuited to substitute a qualified legal counsel which is not just misguided, but dangerous.

A lack of ethical reasoning, empathy, or the inability to adapt to unprecedented situations or negotiations are some of the well-known pitfalls. Then there are of course the risks of using ambiguous wordings or committing drafting errors.

The question is no longer of whether it will be used rather how it can be used responsibly. The tension between speed and the careful judgment that is required continues to spark a debate.

Even though it is much quicker, a blind reliance on it by non-lawyers in an attempt to resolve their legal disputes themselves, can lead to blunders and generate devastatingly wrong results.

Without consulting legal professionals, AI may be useful for guidance as to how best to proceed but can AI accurately produce court documents, follow court procedures, or represent you in court? With the possibility of contempt charges being imposed by the court, any misuse of AI in court related documents carries with it a risk of falling foul of court rules and procedures. In this regard, the years of practice of legal professionals cannot be underestimated.

Since court litigation is not just a matter of data processing and requires a much more nuanced understanding of laws, court procedures, and the human aspects of the case – AI can fall short. From crafting courtroom arguments to developing legal strategies as per the judges and opposing counsel, lawyers consider both human emotions and legal reasoning.

The next place where lawyers step in is when their judgment is truly needed. The worry persists, that answers generated in AI rely largely on pattern recognition and may be unable to take into account the various complexities of legal issues. Since legal drafting is an art as much it is a science, one misplaced word like a ‘shall’ could lead to a completely different meaning.

Moreover, from AI producing fake case laws to wrong citations, we have now seen it all.

In the case of Ayinde v LB Haringey and Al Haroun v Qatar National Bank [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin) five fabricated cases with false citations generated from AI were relied on with the legal arguments. The judgment of the High Court criticised the notion of outsourcing legal research to generative AI. It also mentioned the broad range of court powers in such cases and implications which include:

• the imposition of a costs order,
• imposition of a wasted costs order,
• striking out of a case,
• referral to a regulator,
• the initiation of contempt proceedings, and
• referral to the police.

It was well recognised by the court in Paragraph 5 of the Judgment that:

“Artificial intelligence is a tool that carries with it risks as well as opportunities. Its use must take place therefore with an appropriate degree of oversight, and within a regulatory framework that ensures compliance with well-established professional and ethical standards if public confidence in the administration of justice is to be maintained”.

Following this, on 9th June 2025 the Civil Justice Council announced that a working group had been set up to examine the use of AI in the preparation of court documents and to consider any amendments that need to be made to the Civil Procedure Rules (CPR).

The power of AI to enhance the legal process cannot be ignored but although it helps with the maths, you still need to know the formula.

Maybe a possible combination in the future could be – of not leaving it entirely to the machine but also using it to see what it can produce.

And while we embrace AI in our lives and cannot stop using it every other minute, there are apparent dangers involved in blindly relying on legal advice and arguments generated by AI.

In addition, there is no safety net if AI gets it wrong – the only person to blame will be yourself. Whereas lawyers are insured, and you will have a recourse under their indemnity policy if they were negligent and gave you the wrong advice.

Thus, leaving important legal matters to chance could be a mistake. Always consult an expert lawyer at the first opportunity.

Don’t take the chance with AI, rely on experience.

Our Dispute Resolution solicitors provide clear, strategic advice to help you resolve conflicts effectively. Contact us on 0330 822 3451 to discuss how we can assist you, or request a callback at a time that suits you best.