Legal research is an indispensable skill for lawyers. Therefore, it is always necessary for lawyers to engage in legal research in due course of solving various legal problems. Although the purpose and methodology of the research may vary from lawyer to lawyer, doing research is a common activity. On the other hand, the quest to assess the impacts of artificial intelligence (hereinafter ‘AI’) on legal research allows one to measure the influence of AI on the legal profession in general. Moreover, with the advent of Legal AI, it is now evident that the legal profession is not immune from disruption. Accordingly, this article discusses the impacts of AI on research in the legal profession in general in accomplishing various lawyerly tasks by different legal professionals. The aim of the study is to discuss the current and future positive and negative impacts of AI on research in the legal profession. The study is qualitative in nature and it predominantly relies on document analysis of the relevant primary and secondary sources. Accordingly, the study finds that research in the legal profession is not immune from the impacts of AI and AI influences research in the legal profession, both positively and negatively in enumerable ways. Moreover, it is found that the positive impacts of AI are far greater than its negative externalities, which are usually temporary and related to the disruptive effects of technology on the legal profession. In the future, with the advent of Strong AI, the impact of AI on legal research will be far greater than mere automation.
| Published in | International Journal of Law and Society (Volume 5, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17 |
| Page(s) | 53-65 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Artificial Intelligence, Legal Research, Disruption, Legal AI Tools
| [1] | Mike, M., & Wing, H. C. (2007). Research Methods for Law. Edinburgh University Press. |
| [2] | Carol, M. B., & Margie, H. (2010). Foundations of Legal Research and Writing (4th ed.). Delmar Cengage Learning. |
| [3] | Bakshi, P. M. (2001). Legal Research and Law Reform. In S. K. Verma & M. A. Wani. Legal Research and Methodology (2nd ed.). Indian Law Institute. |
| [4] | Thomas, J. C. (1978). A Modest Programme for the Improvement of Law Teaching. Victoria University of Wellington Law Review, 9 (4), 405-426. |
| [5] | Hutchinson, T. (2006). Researching and Writing in Law (2nd ed.). Pyrmont NSW: Lawbook Co. |
| [6] | Dawn, W., & Mandy, B. (2018). Research Methods in Law (2nd ed.). Routledge Publisher. |
| [7] | Frederick, C. H. (2002). Materials and Methods of Legal Research (3rd ed.). Lawyers Cooperative Pub. Co. |
| [8] | Vick, D. W. (2004). Interdisciplinary and the Discipline of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 31 (2), 163-177. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2004.00286.x. |
| [9] | John, C. W., & Heinz, E. (1995). Legislative Behavior-A Reader in Theory and Research. Free Press of Glencoe. |
| [10] | Amy, E. S. (2018). Basic Legal Research, Tools, and Strategies (7th ed.). Wolters Kluwer. |
| [11] | Edward, A. N. (2008). Basic Legal Research for Paralegals (2nd ed.). Iriwin Publishers. |
| [12] | Valerie, A. B. (2001). Legal Research via the Internet. West Thomson Publishers. |
| [13] | OECD. (2019). Artificial Intelligence in Society. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/eedfee77-en. |
| [14] | Alzbeta, K. (2017). Intersections between Law and Artificial Intelligence. International Journal of Computer 27 (1), 55-68. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/229656008.pdf. |
| [15] | Daniel, B., Yael, F., Adam, L., & Uriel, E. (2017). Artificial Intelligence in the Practice of Law: An Analysis and Proof of Concept Experiment. Rich. J. L. & Tech., 23 (2), 3-53. |
| [16] | Richard, E. S. (1990). Artificial Intelligence, Expert Systems, and Law. Denning Law Journal, 5 (1), 105-116. http://bjll.org/index.php/dlj/article/view/196. |
| [17] | Catalina, G., Gijs, V., & Gerasimos, S. Back to the Future: Waves of Legal Scholarship on Artificial Intelligence, Forthcoming in Sofia, R., & Yaniv, R. (2019). Time, Law, and Change. Hart Publishing. |
| [18] | Paul, H. (2005). Assessing the Influence of Computer-Assisted Legal Research: A Study of California Supreme Court Opinions. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/libpubs/5. |
| [19] | Katherine, M. (2018). Artificially Intelligent Lawyers Updating the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in accordance with the Technological Era. Cardozo Law Review 39, 1498-1530. |
| [20] | Stephen, M. (2012). For Future Reference, a Pioneer in Online Reading. WALL ST. J., 1-10. |
| [21] | Hellyer, P. (2005). Assessing the Influence of Computer-Assisted Legal Research: A Study of California Supreme Court Opinions. Library Staff Publications 5, 1-14. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/libpubs/5. |
| [22] | John, O. M., & Russell, G. P. (2014). The Great Disruption: How Machine Intelligence Will Transform the Role of Lawyers in the Delivery of Legal Services. Fordham Law Review, 82, 3041-3042. |
| [23] | Moore vs Publics Groupe, 287 F. R. D. 182 182 (S. D. N. Y. 2012). |
| [24] | Mary, A. N., & Sherry, X. C. (2017). Artificial Intelligence: Legal Research and Law Librarians. AALL Spectrum, 21 (5), 16-20. http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/lsfp. |
| [25] | Hannah, A. (2016). AI is the Future of Law - And Lawyers Know It. Dataconomy, 1-7. |
| [26] | Andrew, A. (2016). Artificial Intelligence Systems and the Law. Peer To Peer Mag., 38-39. http://epubs.iltanet.org/i/696855-summer-2016/37. |
| [27] | Sterling, M. (2017). Ten Things: Artificial Intelligence-What Every Legal Department Really Needs to Know. https://sterlingmiller2014.wordpress.com/2017/08/15/. |
| [28] | WIPO. (2019). Technology Trends - Artificial Intelligence. |
| [29] | Alyson, C. (2019). Legal Intelligence Through Artificial Intelligence Requires Emotional Intelligence: A New Competency Model for the 21st Century Legal Professional. Georgia State U. L. Rev., 35 (4), 1153-1183. https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/gsulr/vol35/iss4/4. |
| [30] | Whittlestone, J., Nyrup, R., & Alexandrova, A. (2019). Ethical and societal implications of algorithms, data, and artificial intelligence: a roadmap for research. Nuffield Foundation. |
| [31] | Teresa, R. B. (2019). Legal Challenges of Artificial Intelligence: Modeling the Disruptive Features of Emerging Technologies and Assessing their possible Legal Impact. University of Florida L. Rev. 24, 302-314. |
| [32] | Steven, L.,& Mathias, R. (2019). The Future Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Humans and Human Rights. Ethics & International Affairs, 33 (2), 141-158. |
| [33] | Zoubin, G. (2015). Probabilistic Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence. Nature, 521, 452-459. https://www.nature.com/articles/nature14541. |
| [34] | Sean, S., & Zeeve, R. (2017). Artificial Intelligence: Application Today and Implications Tomorrow. Duke Law & Technology Review, 16, 85-99. |
| [35] | Jeff, H. (2017). What Intelligent Machines Need to Learn from the Neocortex. IEEE Spectrum. |
| [36] | Peter, Y. (2019). Artificial Intelligence: Accelerator or Panacea for Financial Crime? Journal of Financial Crime, 26 (2), 634-646. |
| [37] | Hoadley & Lucas (2019). Artificial Intelligence and National Security. Congressional Research Service. https://fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/R45178.pdf. |
| [38] | Lincoln, T., Daniel, A. K., & Jacqueline, M. (2017). The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Medical Innovation in the European Union and United States. (2017) 29 (8) the Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 29 (8), 1-8. |
| [39] | Goldberg, M. D., & Carson, D. O. (1991). Copyright Protection for Artificial Intelligence Systems. 39 (1) Journal of the Copyright Society of the U.S.A., 39 (1), 57-75. |
| [40] | Schaal, E. J. (2004). Infringing a Fantasy: Future Obstacles Arise for the United States Patent Office and Software Manufacturers Utilizing Artificial Intelligence. Villanova Sports & Entertainment Law Journal, 11 (1), 173-202. |
| [41] | Kris, H. (2015). What is Artificial Intelligence?. Computer World. |
| [42] | OECD. (2017). OECD Digital Economy Outlook. OECD Publishing. http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264276284-en. |
| [43] | The Law Society of England and Wales. (2018). Artificial Intelligence and the Legal Profession. Scanning Report. |
| [44] | Thomas, J. B. (2018). Artificial Intelligence in Court Legitimacy Problems of AI Assistance in the Judiciary. Retskraft-Copenhagen Journal of Legal Studies, 2 (1), 41-59. |
| [45] | Maxi, S. (2019). Artificial Intelligence and Legal Decision-Making: The Wide Open Study on the Example of International Arbitration. Queen Mary University of London, School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 318, 1-33. https://ssrn.com/abstract=3392669. |
| [46] | Maxim, D. (2019). The Influence of Artificial Intelligence on Criminal Liability, Challenges of the Knowledge Society. Criminal Law, Lex ET Scientia Int’l J., 140, 48-52. |
| [47] | Deloitte. (2018). 16 Artificial Intelligence projects from Deloitte: Practical cases of applied AI Unleash the power of AI for your organization. Deloitte Netherlands. |
| [48] | Michael, L., & Felicity, B. (2017). Artificial Intelligence and the Legal Profession: A Primer. The Law Society of University of New South Wales. |
| [49] | Steven, P. (2018). Enlightment Now, The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress. Penguines Book Limited Publishers. |
| [50] | Nachshon, S. G., & Giulia, D. (2019). A Note on Science, Legal Research and Artificial Intelligence. Information & Communications Technology Law, 28 (3). 239-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2019.1644065. |
| [51] | Edwina, L. R. (1981). Artificial Intelligence and Law: Stepping Stones to a Model of Legal Reasoning. Yale Law Journal, 99 (8), 1981-82. |
| [52] | David, S., Craig, M., & Ragu, G. (2014). Demystifying Artificial Intelligence: What Business Leaders Need to Know about Cognitive Technologies. Deloitte University Press. |
| [53] | Tania, S. (2018). Judge V Robot? Artificial Intelligence and Judicial Decision Making. UNSW Law Journal, 41 (1), 1114-33. http://www.unswlawjournal.unsw.edu.au/article/. |
| [54] | Andrew, A. (2017). An Ethical Obligation to Use Artificial Intelligence: An Examination of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Law and the Model Rules of Professional Responsibility. American Journal of Trial Advocacy, 40 (3), 443-459. |
| [55] | Microsoft. (2018). The Future Computed Artificial Intelligence and its role in society. Microsoft Corporation. https://blogs.microsoft.com/blog/2018/01/17. |
| [56] | Jyoti, D., & Dabass, B. S. (2018). Scope of Artificial Intelligence in Law. Semantic scholars. |
| [57] | Kevin, D. A. (2017). Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics: New Tools for Law Practice in the Digital Age. Cambridge University Press. |
| [58] | The Encyclopedia Britannica (16th ed.). (2016). |
| [59] | Michael, S. & Julie, M. (2007). Writing Law Dissertations, an Introduction and Guide to the Conduct of Legal Research. Pearson Longman Publishers. |
| [60] | John, W. C. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research (4th ed.). Pearson. |
| [61] | Frascati Manual. (2015). Guidelines for Collecting and Reporting Data on Research and Experimental Development, The Measurement of Scientific, Technological and Innovation Activities. OECD Publishing. |
| [62] | Dawn, W. & Mandy, B. (2018). Research Methods in Law (2nd ed.). Routledge Publisher. |
| [63] | Jain, S. N. (1972). Legal Research and Methodology. Journal of the Indian Law Institute, 14 (4), 487-500. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43950155. |
| [64] | Stephen, E. (2009). Legal Research How to Find & Understand the Law (15th ed.). Nolo Publishers. |
| [65] | Stephanie, D. (2009). Electronic Legal Research an Integrated Approach (2nd ed.). Delmar Cengage Learning. |
| [66] | Valerie, J. & Atkinson, B. (2001). Legal Research via the Internet. West Thomson Publishers. |
| [67] | Frederick, C. H. (1992). Materials and Methods of Legal Research. |
| [68] | John, C. W. & Heinz, E. (1999). Legislative Behavior-A Reader in Theory and Research. Free Press of Glencoe. |
| [69] | Douglas, W. V. (2004). Interdisciplinary and the Discipline of Law. Journal of Law and Society, 31 (2), 163-193. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6478.2004.00286.x. |
| [70] | Sarah, V. (2010). Legal Research as a Fundamental Skill: A Lifeboat for Students and Law Schools. University of Baltimore Law, 39 (2), 173-226. |
| [71] | Richard, S. (2013). Tomorrow’s Lawyers: An Introduction to Your Future (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press. |
| [72] | Benjamin, A., Anthony, N., & Albert, Y. (2017). How Artificial Intelligence Will Affect the Practice of Law. 1-15. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3066816. |
| [73] | Cass, R. S. (2001). Of Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning. Uni. Chicago Public Law & Legal Theory Working Papers No. 18, 1-10. |
| [74] | Sergot, M., Cory, T., & Hammond, P. (1986). Formalization of British Nationality Act. Yearbook of Law Computers and Technology, 2, 40-52. |
| [75] | Faye, M. (2010). The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Digital Forensics: An Introduction. Digital Evidence and Electronic Signature Law Review, 7, 35-41. http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals. |
| [76] | Perel, M., & Elkin-Koren, N. (2017). Black Box Tinkering: Beyond Disclosure in Algorithmic Enforcement. Florida Law Review, 69 (1), 181-221. http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle. |
| [77] | Taylor, B. S. (2019). The Ethical Implications of Artificial Intelligence in the Law. Gonzaga University Law Review, 55 (11), 217-236. |
| [78] | Manyika, J., Chui, M., M. Miremadi, & Bughin, J. (2017). A Future that Works: Automation, Employment, and Productivity, Technical report, McKinsey Global Institute. |
| [79] | Dana, R. & Frank, L. (2016). Can Robots Be Lawyers? Computers, Lawyers, and the Practice of Law. 1, 77. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2701092. |
| [80] | Staci, Z. (2017). Trendspotting? Major U.K. Client Refuses To Pay Junior Big law Attorneys. Above the Law. https://abovethelaw.com/2017/03/trendspotting. |
| [81] | David, H. (2017). Ross Intelligence: Artificial Intelligence in Legal Research. Blue Hill Research. |
| [82] | Andrew, A., & Matt, S. (2017). Artificial Intelligence: Will it Replace Lawyers? ROSS Intelligence and Artificial Intelligence in Legal Research. Blue Hill Benchmark Report Number A0280, 2-10. |
| [83] | Albert, H. Y. (2016). Cognitive Computing and the Future of the Legal Profession. University of Toronto Law Journal, 66, 456-471. http://dx.doi.org/10.3138/UTLJ.4005. |
| [84] | Samuel, G. (2016). Chatbot Lawyer Overturns 160,000 Parking Tickets in London and New York. The Guardian. |
| [85] | James, A. S. (1976). Computer-Assisted Legal Research: Westlaw and Lexis. American Bar Association Journal, 62, 320-323. https://www.jstor.org/stable/25727555. |
| [86] | James, L. H. (1991). Legal Scholarship and the Electronic Revolution. Law Library J. 83, 643-64. |
| [87] | Frank, Y., Liu, J. F., Dittakavi, N. R., & Tsegaye, B. (2008). Pennsylvania Legal Research Handbook. ALM Media, LLC. |
| [88] | Daniel, M. K. (2013). Quantitative Legal Prediction-or-How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Start Preparing for the Data-Driven Future of the Legal Services Industry. Emory Law Journal, 62, 909- 936. |
| [89] | Aletras, N., Tsarapatsanis, D., & Preoţiuc, P. (2016). Predicting judicial decisions of the European Court of Human Rights: a Natural Language Processing perspective. Peer Journal of Computer Science, 2, 93-94. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.93. |
| [90] | Katz, D. M., Bommarito, M. J., & Blackman, J. (2017). A General Approach for Predicting the Behaviour of the Supreme Court of the United States. PLoS ONE, 12 (4), 1-4. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0174698. |
| [91] | Eric, B., & Andrew, M. (2014). The Second Machine Age. W. Norton & Company Inc. |
| [92] | Nancy, N. S. (2019). Herald! The Era of Legal Artificial Intelligence in Legal Practice. The Law Society of Kenya Advocates Magazine (Annual Conference Edition). 1-20. |
| [93] | The EU Declaration on Cooperation on Artificial Intelligence. (2018). The European Parliament Resolution on Civil Law Rules on Robotics (2015/2103 (INL)) (2018/C 252/25) 2017. |
| [94] | Tania, S. (2015). Justice and Technological Innovation. Journal of Judicial Administration, 25 (2), 96-105. https://goo.gl/hxbXri. |
| [95] | Horizon. (2018). Artificial Intelligence (AI) and the Legal Profession. The Law Society of England and Wales, Report, 6. |
| [96] | ROSS Intelligence, ‘ROSS Intelligence announces partnership with BakerHostetler’ (2016) 1. |
| [97] | Cary, G. D., & George, R. C. (1986). Artificial Intelligence Application in the Law: CCLIPS, a Computer Program That Processes Legal Information. http://dx.doi.org/doi:10.15779/Z382Q13. |
| [98] | Michael, M. (2016). Artificial Intelligence in Law: the State of Play. 3-6. |
| [99] | John, R. A., & et al. (2014). Understanding the Realities of Modern Patent Litigation. Texas Law Review, 92, 1769-1773. |
| [100] | Jason, T. (2017). Artificial Intelligence Software Outperforms Lawyers (without subject matter expertise) in Matchup. ABA Journal Megazin. https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/. |
| [101] | M. Simon, A. Lindsay, L. Sosa & P. Comparato (2018). Lola v. Skadden and the Automation of the Legal Profession. Yale J. L. & Tech., 20, 234-35. |
| [102] | Legal Robot. (2016) 1-5. http://www.legalrobot.com. |
| [103] | How It Helps, BEAGLE. (2016). http://beagle.ai/. |
| [104] | Bas, B. V. (2017). Artificial Intelligence and the Future for Legal Services. Clifford Chance, 1-8. |
| [105] | Moore vs Publicis Groupe, 287 F. R. D. 182 (S. D. N. Y. 2012; Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Limited v Quinn [2015] IEHC 175; see also, Pyrrho Investments Ltd v MWB Property Ltd [2016] EWHC 256 (Ch). |
| [106] | McConnell Dowell Constructors (Aust) Pty Ltd v Santam Ltd and Others (No 1) [2016] VSC 734 (Vickery J) (“McConnell Dowell”). |
| [107] | Maura, R. G., & Gordon, V. C. (2011). Technology-Assisted Review in E-Discovery Can Be More Effective and More Efficient Than Exhaustive Manual Review. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology, 17 (3), 1-49. http://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol17/iss3/5. |
| [108] | Chris, D. (2010). Having The Acuity to Determine Relevance with Predictive Coding. E-Disclosure Information Project. https://perma.cc/727C-CWVT. |
| [109] | Kathryn, D. B., & Kyle, R. J., The Dawn of Fully Automated Contract Drafting: Machine Learning Breathes New Life into a Decades-Old Promise. Duke Law & Technology Review, 15, 216-218. |
| [110] | John, S. (2002). Can Computers Think?’ in David, J. C. (2002). Philosophy of Mind: Classical and Contemporary Readings. Oxford University Press. |
| [111] | Mark, M. (2017). Legal Technology: Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Law Practice. Appeal: Rev. Current L. & L. Reform, 22, 45-46. |
| [112] | Justice, M. P. (2017). iDecide: Administrative Decision-Making in the Digital World. Australian Law Journal, 91, 29-30. |
| [113] | Mirjana, S., Ravi, G., Bertrand, A., & et al. (2017). Exploring Legal, Ethical and Policy Implications of Artificial Intelligence. Law, Justice, and Development White Paper, 1-15. https://globalforumljd.com/resources/. |
APA Style
Samuel Maireg Biresaw, Abhijit Umesh Saste. (2022). The Impacts of Artificial Intelligence on Research in the Legal Profession. International Journal of Law and Society, 5(1), 53-65. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17
ACS Style
Samuel Maireg Biresaw; Abhijit Umesh Saste. The Impacts of Artificial Intelligence on Research in the Legal Profession. Int. J. Law Soc. 2022, 5(1), 53-65. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17
AMA Style
Samuel Maireg Biresaw, Abhijit Umesh Saste. The Impacts of Artificial Intelligence on Research in the Legal Profession. Int J Law Soc. 2022;5(1):53-65. doi: 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17,
author = {Samuel Maireg Biresaw and Abhijit Umesh Saste},
title = {The Impacts of Artificial Intelligence on Research in the Legal Profession},
journal = {International Journal of Law and Society},
volume = {5},
number = {1},
pages = {53-65},
doi = {10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ijls.20220501.17},
abstract = {Legal research is an indispensable skill for lawyers. Therefore, it is always necessary for lawyers to engage in legal research in due course of solving various legal problems. Although the purpose and methodology of the research may vary from lawyer to lawyer, doing research is a common activity. On the other hand, the quest to assess the impacts of artificial intelligence (hereinafter ‘AI’) on legal research allows one to measure the influence of AI on the legal profession in general. Moreover, with the advent of Legal AI, it is now evident that the legal profession is not immune from disruption. Accordingly, this article discusses the impacts of AI on research in the legal profession in general in accomplishing various lawyerly tasks by different legal professionals. The aim of the study is to discuss the current and future positive and negative impacts of AI on research in the legal profession. The study is qualitative in nature and it predominantly relies on document analysis of the relevant primary and secondary sources. Accordingly, the study finds that research in the legal profession is not immune from the impacts of AI and AI influences research in the legal profession, both positively and negatively in enumerable ways. Moreover, it is found that the positive impacts of AI are far greater than its negative externalities, which are usually temporary and related to the disruptive effects of technology on the legal profession. In the future, with the advent of Strong AI, the impact of AI on legal research will be far greater than mere automation.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - The Impacts of Artificial Intelligence on Research in the Legal Profession AU - Samuel Maireg Biresaw AU - Abhijit Umesh Saste Y1 - 2022/01/26 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17 DO - 10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17 T2 - International Journal of Law and Society JF - International Journal of Law and Society JO - International Journal of Law and Society SP - 53 EP - 65 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2640-1908 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijls.20220501.17 AB - Legal research is an indispensable skill for lawyers. Therefore, it is always necessary for lawyers to engage in legal research in due course of solving various legal problems. Although the purpose and methodology of the research may vary from lawyer to lawyer, doing research is a common activity. On the other hand, the quest to assess the impacts of artificial intelligence (hereinafter ‘AI’) on legal research allows one to measure the influence of AI on the legal profession in general. Moreover, with the advent of Legal AI, it is now evident that the legal profession is not immune from disruption. Accordingly, this article discusses the impacts of AI on research in the legal profession in general in accomplishing various lawyerly tasks by different legal professionals. The aim of the study is to discuss the current and future positive and negative impacts of AI on research in the legal profession. The study is qualitative in nature and it predominantly relies on document analysis of the relevant primary and secondary sources. Accordingly, the study finds that research in the legal profession is not immune from the impacts of AI and AI influences research in the legal profession, both positively and negatively in enumerable ways. Moreover, it is found that the positive impacts of AI are far greater than its negative externalities, which are usually temporary and related to the disruptive effects of technology on the legal profession. In the future, with the advent of Strong AI, the impact of AI on legal research will be far greater than mere automation. VL - 5 IS - 1 ER -
Information
Email: