Artificial intelligence has transformed the way we live and work – this is true for marketing agencies, for school teachers, and for the legal field. Rapidly developing AI technologies, particularly Generative AI, Large Language Models (LLMs) and Natural Language Processing (NLP), are streamlining operations, enhancing accuracy and allowing lawyers to better utilise their time.
While any period of rapid change can seem scary, artificial intelligence for law firms can contribute to the most tedious and time-consuming aspects of the field, freeing up more time to spend with clients. In fact, it’s estimated that over half of the current desk slog performed by lawyers could be automated by AI.
It goes without saying that AI for legal spaces can increase efficiency and reduce costs across the board. AI can understand context, generate text, perform legal research, and review, draft, and summarise documents.
If you’re interested in leveraging AI to increase efficiency and profitability, our consultants at AI Consulting Group (AICG) can help. Our team is armed with technical resources and specialised capabilities, as well as exceptional customer and business communication skills.
Want to learn more?
From criminal to commercial law, and contract analysis to predictive crime mapping, let’s talk about how AI can make the practice of law more straightforward.
| Type of Law | How AI is Being Used |
|---|---|
| Criminal Law |
|
| Personal Injury Law |
|
| Civil Litigation |
|
| Commercial Law |
|
Natural Language Processing and Large Language Models have improved the automated translation capabilities of AI.
This can be used to:
AI transcription services can automatically convert spoken courtroom proceedings into written transcripts in real time.
This helps lawyers and judges keep track of the proceedings, review testimony, and refer to specific statements during cross-examination or closing arguments.
AI has also been used to generate summaries of the proceedings
Litigation analysis is one of the most time-consuming aspects of law. In the past, determining the viability of litigation or quantifying the value of a lawsuit has required extensive analysis of precedent-setting cases.
Today, AI can quickly analyse large volumes of court decisions, judge behaviour, and case facts.
By identifying patterns and correlations, AI systems provide lawyers with insights into the strengths and weaknesses of arguments, in order to develop a successful litigation strategy.
AI is effective and disruptive in equal measure, and as the world evolves to understand both its uses and its implications, there is the question of how to implement AI ethically.
In the case of law, this comes down to fairness, accountability, and honesty. No amount of time saved can compensate if the technology is not being employed with integrity.
The International Organisation for Standardisation (ISO) has developed specific standards for artificial intelligence to ensure safety, transparency, and ethical use — AI Consulting Group are unique as a consultancy, having 5 ISO certified implementers and auditors on the team.
Our AI Governance framework carefully aligns to Australian Governments AI Ethics Framework, Voluntary AI Safety Standard (10 Guardrails), ISO / IEC JTC 1/SC 42 Artificial Intelligence Standards, UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence, and the US National Institute of Science and Technology AI Risk Management Framework.
There is no one in the industry better placed to balance robust AI Governance with practical implementation standards.
Here are some other key ethical considerations :
Bias and fairness
AI is a product of the data it is fed. This means that AI systems can perpetuate or even exacerbate biases present in the data they’ve been trained on, leading to unfair outcomes like unusually prolonged sentencing or disproportionate bail recommendations.
AI tools must be carefully designed and tested to ensure that unbiased outcomes are produced, regardless of race, gender, socioeconomic status, or other factors.
One of the major advantages of AI (when used correctly) is its potential for impartiality. However, any law firm looking to utilise AI should perform due diligence and rigorous testing to avoid biased outcomes.
Many AI models, particularly complex ones, are not easily interpretable, making it challenging to understand how decisions are made. This is sometimes known as the ‘black box problem.’
Any AI systems used in a legal setting must be transparent and explainable.
Determining who is accountable when AI systems make mistakes—whether it’s the developers, the deploying organisation, or legal practitioners—can be complex. Legal professionals should ensure that they use AI responsibly, and understand its limitations.
Artificial intelligence should complement rather than replace human judgment, so it’s essential to take responsibility for all work produced.
Legal AI systems often process sensitive client data. Ensuring the privacy and security of this data is crucial to maintaining client confidentiality and complying with the relevant data protection laws.
Additionally, the data used to train AI systems should be ethically sourced, with respect for privacy and without infringing on individuals’ rights.
This is where informed consent comes in – at all stages, clients should be informed about how their data will be used by AI in legal systems and provide consent, particularly in jurisdictions with strict privacy laws.
When it comes to AI laws, the reality is a lot of legal practitioners are not on the ball because they don’t understand AI – and neither do our representatives in parliament. While the US and EU scramble to put together laws around the use of AI, Australia is lagging behind.
As of January 2025, Australia does not have specific legislation or AI regulation. Instead, AI is governed under existing legal frameworks, including consumer protection, data privacy, competition, copyright, and anti-discrimination laws.
The only specific parameters have come from Chief Justice of New South Wales, Andrew Bell, who prohibited the use of AI in the creation of key evidence documents, like affidavits and witness statements. Additionally, judges are restricted from using AI to draft or edit judgments.
