As the world enters the age of artificial intelligence, the legal profession is once again faced with balancing two crucial elements of the administration of justice: efficiency v effectiveness.

This article is the first of a series of tech-focused pieces aimed at exploring the undeniable benefits of integrating new technology into the day-to-day practice of lawyers while also considering the risks that come with these rapid and pervasive changes.

Earlier this year, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice in Britain, delivered his keynote speech The Digital Age and its Effect on Bench, Bar and Business at a conference hosted by the Bermuda Bar Association.

Sir Geoffrey highlighted the major technological advancements observed in the legal space over the past 25 years and the need for members of the Bar to embrace emerging technologies, noting that “if lawyers and judges do not quickly sort out the parameters of appropriate use of AI for themselves, how will their legal system be able to properly adjudicate on the appropriate use of AI in those sectors?”

Indeed, AI can be used to assist in the efficient and effective delivery of a host of legal services, from drafting to research and even document review. The Covid-19 pandemic introduced a new “remote” way of life, which has brought positive changes to the way we interact with both clients and the judiciary.

Video conferences and hearings, digital record-keeping and e-discovery are just a few examples of how the practice of law has become more efficient and cost-effective through modern technology.

As beneficial as this may be, it is crucial to understand that there must be limitation on the use of these tools, particularly as we are still in the early stages of AI development.

Law is a highly technical field. One that has been and continues to be refined through human analysis and scrutiny — a level of cognition that has yet to be available via the mainstream AI that is presently available to the public.

While AI tools can be beneficial to those without proper legal representation, such as litigants in person, there is an inherent risk that advice given by these tools requires further review by a qualified attorney who is not only experienced in the relevant field, but in the appropriate legal jurisdiction.

Use of AI also comes with privacy-related concerns as information required to produce advice must be shared with often unsecured online platforms, exposing confidential data to publicly accessible spaces.

It is clear that AI will fundamentally change the future of litigation, but it is far from replacing human analysis. To paraphrase the eminent neurosurgeon and professor, Antonio Di leva, technology will not replace lawyers, but lawyers who use AI will soon replace those who don’t.

AI is a powerful tool with the potential for creating a more efficient and effective justice system. It is up to those who embrace this technology to ensure it is used in a safe and informed manner.

We must fully understand these tools before using them — knowing both their advantages and their limitations — to mitigate any risks and potential errors in their output.

Being mindful of the data we input will ensure data is anonymised when necessary and confidential information remains secure.

Above all, we must verify the accuracy of all information provided by AI tools, until such time that we are confident in the analysis it provides within a defined scope of instructions.

In the upcoming instalments of this series, we will explore the potential effects of AI on intellectual property and copyright infringement, privacy and data protection, human rights law and legal privilege.

• If you have any questions about the use of AI or modern technology in litigation, please contact a member of Appleby’s dispute resolution team. Kiara Wilkinson and Ligaya Sanchez-Wilson are associates in the dispute resolution team at Appleby. A copy of this column is available at www.applebyglobal.com. This column should not be used as a substitute for professional legal advice. Before proceeding with any matters discussed here, persons are advised to consult a lawyer