Artificial intelligence (AI) could provide a revolution in fairness and justice, particularly for those who cannot afford to fight their corner against a wealthier opponent. There are many legal battles fought and lost every day because people cannot afford to press their case, creating a fairness gap in the justice system. Legal AI is already affecting the practice of law, by automating basic work such as contract-writing and analysing thousands of pages of evidence in complex cases. Now it is beginning to fill the fairness gap.
The Westway Trust’s Cost of Living Crisis Clinic, in one of the poorest neighbourhoods in England, helps clients with a range of complicated disputes – from benefits appeals to disputes with landlords. Now the Trust is using AI tools to cut through complex documents to find the key facts and legal issues that could win or lose their case. As paralegal adviser Adam Samji explains, the tools will save the Trust hours of work: “We upload it on to an AI model and that will give us all that information. It’ll usually shoot it back in about 10 to 15 minutes. “It will save us hours of having to do it ourselves. We can efficiently use our time, as their paralegal volunteers, to better serve our clients.”
In addition to work such as contract-writing, AI tools are being developed to analyse testimonies in court and compare case evidence in real-time. While some predict these technologies “will enable one lawyer, two lawyers to do the job of 10 or 20,” others are warning about the practical risk of human error. The Trust is already having to spend time checking their AI tool’s accuracy, as John Mahoney, a lawyer at the organisation, explains: “At the moment, about one in 30 occasions it’s not accurate. So we’re having to check all of the work that we produce through AI that relates to giving legal opinions.”
When asked if AI could be used to create roboshops, leading to biases in the system, Sir Geoffrey Vos, the head of civil justice in England and Wales, explained that while judges are being aided by technological tools, it is still important that individuals have access to an independent judge to decide their case: “The parties must know that’s happening. Judges are being assisted by technological tools. We have been for years. You obviously are talking about Robo-judges. But I think we’re a long way from that. The rule of law requires that lawyers remain responsible for the evidence they put before a court.
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
