Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly changed how legal services are delivered, particularly by automating time-consuming processes such as document review, legal research, and contract analysis. According to a 2024 LexisNexis survey of over 1,200 UK legal professionals, AI adoption has doubled over the past year. Many law firms have begun allocating dedicated budgets for AI-driven tools, particularly those using generative AI. These tools promise faster turnarounds and enhanced productivity, streamlining many of the daily procedural burdens legal teams face.
However, while AI can accelerate processes and reduce manual labour, its reliability remains scrutinised. AI tools have been found to fabricate sources and generate factual errors, sometimes leading to real-world consequences. In one well-publicised incident, a federal judge in Alabama considered imposing sanctions on a law firm after its court filing included false citations produced by ChatGPT. Such incidents highlight a critical issue: AI offers valuable support but cannot function without rigorous human oversight.
This article examines the growing use of AI in legal work, its associated risks, and why trained legal professionals remain irreplaceable.
The Rise of AI in Legal Work
The legal sector is among several industries experiencing significant digital transformation due to AI. A recent study found that 96% of UK law firms now use AI in some capacity, and 58% report widespread or universal implementation within their practices. AI tools are commonly used for contract lifecycle management, legal document drafting, discovery processes, and even predictive analytics during litigation planning.
The appeal of these tools is obvious: they reduce turnaround time, allow junior legal staff to focus on higher-value work, and help manage massive volumes of documentation that would otherwise be costly and labour-intensive. Tasks that once took hours can now be completed in minutes, giving firms a competitive edge in delivering legal services.
Despite these clear benefits, AI is not without its limitations. One of the most persistent issues is the phenomenon of “hallucinations”, instances in which AI generates plausible but completely incorrect information. Research conducted by Stanford University and the University of California, Berkeley found that AI legal research tools produced hallucinated content between 17% and 33% of the time, depending on the complexity of the query. This creates significant risks when used in real legal matters.
Why Human Oversight Remains Crucial
The legal system relies heavily on precedent, nuanced interpretation, and ethical judgment. While AI can process data at scale, it cannot reason with human sensitivity, interpret social and cultural context, or understand the gravity of legal outcomes.
Trained legal professionals are pivotal in interpreting statutes, weighing evidence, and applying legal frameworks to individual circumstances. AI cannot replicate these competencies. A machine learning model may understand that certain words relate to specific legal outcomes. Still, it cannot critically assess those outcomes’ implications or real-world consequences.
For example, in a case involving a journalist accused of unauthorised access to information, lawyers were found to have used AI tools, including ChatGPT and Westlaw AI, to generate a legal brief. Unfortunately, the submission contained serious inaccuracies, including references to fictitious cases and fabricated quotations from supposed judicial rulings. This type of error illustrates the dangers of over-reliance on AI without human validation.
Moreover, the ability to assess a client’s unique situation, account for human emotions, and offer bespoke legal advice based on experience and personal judgment remains firmly within the human domain. AI simply lacks the contextual intelligence required to deliver this level of service.
Ethical and Regulatory Considerations
Beyond technical accuracy, AI introduces several ethical concerns. Legal professionals are bound by confidentiality, due diligence, and fiduciary responsibilities. AI tools, especially those powered by large language models, may store, reuse, or mishandle sensitive information if not properly vetted. According to the Law Society’s 2023 report, 64% of legal professionals cited data security and confidentiality as their primary concerns when adopting AI tools.
Moreover, the regulatory framework for AI use in legal services remains under development. Limited standards for auditing the accuracy or reliability of these systems place the burden of responsibility on legal practitioners. Failure to verify AI outputs could result in professional negligence, creating a new layer of risk for law firms and their clients.
It is also worth noting that ethical considerations extend beyond simple use. Delegating critical thinking and ethical judgment to an automated system, no matter how efficient, undermines the integrity of the legal profession. As guardians of justice, legal professionals must ensure that their tools support, rather than compromise, the quality of service delivered to clients.
The Role of Legal Training and Experience
AI can assist, but it cannot replace the foundation of knowledge developed through years of legal education and practical experience. Solicitors and barristers are trained not only in the letter of the law but also in its application, evolution, and impact on individuals and businesses. This depth of understanding equips them to detect inconsistencies, challenge unfair rulings, and provide sound advice that reflects the best interests of their clients.
Even in highly routine tasks, human oversight remains important. Consider contract review. While AI can flag potential issues or suggest amendments, only a legal professional can judge whether those suggestions are commercially viable or align with the client’s strategic objectives.
Similarly, legal negotiation requires interpersonal skills and intuition that no algorithm can replicate. Lawyers must read between the lines, respond to the nuances of tone and language, and adapt their arguments in real time based on verbal and nonverbal cues, skills that remain entirely human.
Looking Ahead: A Balanced Approach
As AI continues to evolve, its role in legal work will likely expand. Firms are expected to invest more in AI tools, and emerging regulations may eventually introduce standards for ethical usage. However, legal professionals must lead this transformation, ensuring that AI is a tool, not a decision-maker.
The future lies in hybrid models where AI handles repetitive, high-volume tasks, and human experts apply legal reasoning, ethical scrutiny, and strategic insight. This division of labour enhances efficiency and protects the integrity and trustworthiness of legal services.
Firms must adopt clear policies for AI use, including defined procedures for reviewing outputs, regular audits for accuracy, and comprehensive staff training. AI should be seen as a co-pilot, helpful but not autonomous.
For a detailed examination of the shortcomings of automated legal systems and the essential nature of human expertise, read this in-depth article on why AI in legal work still falls short.
Conclusion
AI is transforming legal workflows and helping firms respond to increasing demand and complexity. However, its limitations, particularly its lack of contextual understanding, ethical reasoning, and emotional intelligence, mean it cannot function independently. Legal expertise remains essential for ensuring justice is delivered accurately, fairly, and responsibly.
By applying thoughtful oversight and preserving the human element at the centre of legal practice, professionals can embrace the benefits of AI while upholding the standards that clients and society depend on.