Author: Eimear McCann
Artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly changing the landscape of litigation. No longer a futuristic concept, AI is fast becoming an integral part of legal workflows, promising an array of benefits including increased efficiency, cost savings, and augmented decision-making.
At some point though, we do need to really ask what tasks and segments of our work really deserve to be expedited and automated; and what will we do with the time we’ve saved?
Arguably, law’s ambivalent relationship with legal technology continues to follow the classic path of disruption, moving through natural phases: initially automating traditional tasks, deconstructing workflows, and ultimately reimagining processes around new capabilities. There is a sense that AI, much like historic innovations we now take for granted, is misunderstood to a degree, which inevitably means that many lawyers still view AI as an ambiguous concept rather than a useful tool.
The real transformation within the sector can only really happen when we rethink the practice of law itself. A critical factor in this transformation is the ability to generate actionable insights. AI’s real value lies in its capacity to turn vast amounts of data into meaningful, practical outputs that guide decision-making. Whether identifying legal risks, optimising case strategies, or improving client services, actionable insights allow lawyers to make informed, strategic choices. Simply put, AI isn’t just about working faster—it’s about working more strategically.
Legal teams are realising that deploying AI is futile unless it offers clarity, relevance and most importantly, practical solutions to a problem; but how does this look in the disputes context? Collaborative litigation workspaces, powered by AI, are a very good starting point. Rather than simply automating processes that we deem to be the norm, e.g., moving from paper to electronic bundles, these workspaces offer the freedom to rethink litigation workflows, offering dynamic, interactive hubs, removing friction points along the way.
Litigation remains labour-intensive, and document heavy. Whilst much of this has been digitised; the digital data we continue to create is increasing at such an explosive rate that AI is now a necessity. Historically, AI powered software in litigation has been limited to e-Discovery, but with the lines blurring between disclosure and bundling, there is a clear need for AI tools to pull the threads of data together, from inception to hearing (or settlement).
In a sense, these AI workspaces address one of the sharpest pain points in hearing preparation, bridging the gap between disclosure and bundle prep, and essentially providing a centralised hub for legal teams. Not only does this facilitate faster communication and easy access to the case data, but there are additional benefits, for example:
- AI tools can automatically categorise, tag, date and analyse documents as they are uploaded to the platform, making it easier for legal teams to find relevant information and identify potential issues.
- AI can analyse communication patterns within the workspace, ensuring that crucial information is not missed and that all team members stay informed. Moreover, AI can pick out insights and links that the human brain may overlook.
- By empowering users to quickly and easily find relevant facts within large volumes of documents, inconsistency detection is feasible, and fast.
- Automated witness statement generation and speech-to-text transcription can expedite hearing preparation, whilst offering reassurance that we’re in compliance with relevant Practice Directions (e.g., PD 57AC
- Increased efficiency: The friction points of typical hearing prep are eradicated, replaced by a dynamic case management system and a bundling tool wrapped up in one.
- Cost saving: avoids the usual duplication of communication and document sharing, with a single source of truth engaged throughout the litigation process.
- Augmented team collaboration: A centralised platform facilitates seamless communication and information sharing among team members, regardless of location.
- Improved strategic decision-making: AI-driven analytics provide insights that can inform legal strategy and lead to better outcomes.
- Enhanced client service: Clients benefit from increased efficiency, transparency, and data-driven advice.
On the latter point, the well-informed client is already asking their law firm which AI tools they are deploying, and how these tools are driving efficiencies.
Beyond efficiency gains, AI is also transforming litigation strategy. This ability to extract actionable intelligence from data allows litigators to gain a deeper understanding of the facts of a case: AI can highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both sides in a dispute, enabling legal teams to make strategic decisions sooner.
Conclusion: When AI meets AI
As tech continues to evolve, so too will our understanding of these new tools. This is surely a natural process, as we transition from trepidation to confidence.
We will inevitably save time in one area, only to find our time consumed in a different way (for example, instead of hours lost at a photocopier, many are still grappling with new bundling tools), but we are still learning, and once we have a deeper sense of the capabilities of these tools, we can properly begin to use AI to derive actionable insights to change our behaviours.
As a final thought, if we narrow our focus to ensure we engage AI only for what it does best – an education piece in itself – our progress will be swifter. We know that AI is excellent at two things, which are highly relevant for the legal profession: it is incredibly powerful when engaged across vast amounts of data, and equally, AI tools excel when asked to navigate us to a specific place of knowledge. The conflation of these two qualities would suggest that AI workspaces are the perfect starting point towards our reimagined future for litigation.
Eimear McCann
Eimear is a former lawyer, and currently Commercial Director of TrialView, an AI litigation platform. She also lectures in legal tech and innovation at BPP University and is a member of the Law Society Technology & Law Committee.