Key Findings and Challenges from the Legal AI Use Case Radar Report 2024

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to the article 

Background and Methodology
The "Legal AI Use Case Radar Report 2024," authored by an interdisciplinary team at the Technical University of Munich, investigates how AI is being used in the legal domain in Germany. Through a combination of literature review, interviews with legal professionals, surveys, and experience reports on lawyers using and implementing legal AI, the authors sought to identify the most relevant AI use cases and assess their significance. The use cases are rated based on four key evaluation metrics: 

1. Legal Relevance: Captures the perceived need of a use case in the legal domain.

2. Academic Interest: Reflects the current state of reviewed literature and the frequency of technical solutions appearing in academic sources.

3. ELSA Concerns: Assesses ethical, legal, and societal implications, capturing the perceived riskiness of a use case.

4. Number of Experience Reports: Gathers insights into the frequency of use cases being realized among interviewees.

Key Findings
According to the report’s radar evaluation, the top-scoring use cases are:
 

Category 3: Document Generation and Assistance. Summarization: AI tools that generate concise summaries of long legal documents rank highly, proving useful in quickly providing key insights from complex texts.

Category 4: Information Processing and Extraction. Information Extraction: This use case is widely adopted, enabling the automated extraction of relevant entities and information from large volumes of legal text, streamlining document review processes. Document Retrieval: AI-powered retrieval systems help legal professionals quickly find relevant documents, making research and case preparation more efficient.

Category 6: Legal Information Retrieval and Support. Chatbot Client Intake and Drafting: AI chatbots assisting in client intake and drafting standard documents are gaining traction for their ability to automate repetitive tasks. Question Answering: AI systems that provide answers to legal questions based on a curated knowledge base are becoming increasingly relevant. Translation: Automated translation tools are valuable for firms dealing with multilingual documents, offering quick and accurate translations.

Category 7: Legal Research and Information Management. Research Tools / Research Automation: Tools that automate legal research are among the highest-scoring use cases, demonstrating their critical role in improving the efficiency and accuracy of legal research.

Challenges in Implementing Legal AI Use Cases
The report highlights several key challenges in implementing AI in legal settings:
 

1. Document Analysis and Management:
- Human Oversight: Most processes still need human involvement.
- OCR Limitations: Struggles with older, paper-only documents.
- Structured Data: Harder for NLP tools to process than unstructured text.
- Hallucinations: LLMs can produce misleading information.
 

2. AI Solution Providers:
- Marketing: SaaS solutions in law are tough to market due to evolving requirements.
- Resource-Intensive: Custom solutions need constant updates with changing laws.
- Training: Users need proper training for effective adoption.
 

3. In-House AI Development:
- Resource Demands: Building in-house AI is costly and complex.
- Token Management: Managing costs with LLM usage can be challenging.
- Rapid Tech Advances: Hard to keep up with AI's fast pace.
 

4. Specific AI Tools and Applications:
- Integration: Incorporating AI into existing systems is time-consuming.
- Data Dependence: Relying on past documents may not reflect current law changes.
- Confidentiality: Ensuring data anonymity and confidentiality is crucial.
 

5. Wider Adoption and Ethical Concerns:
- Resistance to Change: Institutions are hesitant to change existing processes.
- Ethical Concerns: Risks like fraud, privacy issues, and compliance challenges are significant barriers.

These challenges highlight the complexity of integrating AI into legal workflows, requiring strategic planning and training to unlock its full potential.
 

Impact on the Billable Hour
The report touches on the impact of AI on the traditional billing model in two experience reports. In ER13 (page 37), a global law firm mentions that "rethinking of business model (hourly billing vs. flat fee) might be necessary if AI increases efficiency." Similarly, ER14 (page 38) from a German law firm notes that "usage of AI leads to a paradigm shift from billing by the hour to a flat fee model." These insights suggest that AI's efficiency could challenge the billable hour model, prompting some firms to consider alternative billing structures like flat fees. However, the report does not delve deeply into this topic, leaving room for further exploration on how AI might reshape billing practices in the legal industry.
 

Conclusion and Future Outlook
Overall, the report paints an optimistic picture of AI's role in the legal field. While acknowledging the current exploratory phase, it highlights a diverse range of AI applications already in use across various companies. The report predicts continued experimentation and validation of these technologies in daily legal work over the coming year. As AI becomes more integrated into legal practices, it promises to enhance efficiency in tasks like document analysis and legal research, allowing professionals to focus on more complex, value-added activities.

However, the report emphasizes a crucial point: "As Legal AI technologies continue to become more available and capable, it is important to keep their practical applicability in sight, as without defined use cases, the promise of AI technologies will not reach their full potential in the legal domain." This highlights the necessity for a clear, practical strategy when implementing AI, ensuring that the technology fulfills its promise and potential.