AI, Legal Research and the Importance of a Legal Sense Check

AI can be a helpful starting point, but it is not a substitute for legal advice.

A useful first step

Artificial intelligence is becoming part of everyday life. For many people, it is now the first place they turn when they want to understand a legal issue, get to grips with unfamiliar terminology, or work out what questions they ought to be asking.

Used carefully, that can be a good thing.

AI tools can summarise broad principles, explain legal phrases in plain English and help a person prepare a more focused conversation with their solicitor. They can be particularly useful where someone is at the very early stage of a problem and is trying to understand the landscape before deciding what to do next.

The danger is confidence

The difficulty is that AI often presents its answers with a level of confidence which can make them sound more certain than they really are. A legal answer will often depend on the facts, the documents, the precise legal relationship between the parties, the jurisdiction, limitation periods, available evidence and the practical cost of pursuing a claim.

Those details are important.

A principle that is perfectly sound in one area of law can be misleading if it is lifted out of context and applied to a different kind of dispute. That is not because the principle is wrong, but because law is rarely just a matter of matching a phrase to a problem.

The eggshell skull example

A good example is the so-called “eggshell skull” rule, sometimes also called the “thin skull” rule. In broad terms, this is a principle most commonly associated with personal injury claims. It means that a defendant must take the injured person as they find them. If a person is unusually vulnerable and, as a result, suffers greater injury than another person might have suffered from the same wrongful act, that vulnerability does not automatically reduce the defendant’s responsibility.

In its proper setting, the principle is important and well established.

However, it does not follow that the same rule can simply be taken and applied across a broad range of legal disputes. A potential client may ask an AI tool whether the eggshell skull rule could assist in a business disagreement and receive an answer suggesting that it might apply widely. That answer may be understandable at a very general level, but it may also be dangerously incomplete.

Commercial disputes are different

Commercial claims often turn on different questions. Was there a contract? What did it say? Was there a breach? Was the loss caused by that breach? Was the loss too remote? Were there exclusions or limitations of liability? Was the loss reasonably foreseeable? Was there a duty to mitigate?

Those questions cannot usually be answered by importing a personal injury principle and assuming it produces the same result.

That is where a solicitor’s role becomes important. A lawyer can test whether the legal principle is relevant, whether it applies on the facts, whether there is better authority for the point, and whether the argument is worth running at all. Just as importantly, a lawyer can explain the risks of relying on an attractive but uncertain argument.

AI as a resource, not an adviser

The better way to use AI is as a research aid rather than as a decision-maker. It can help identify themes, generate questions, and give a broad explanation of an unfamiliar concept. It may help someone arrive at a meeting with their solicitor better prepared and more able to describe what they are worried about.

It should not be treated as the final word.

Legal advice involves judgement. It requires an understanding of the facts, the documents, the client’s commercial objectives and the law as it applies to that particular situation. AI can provide a useful prompt, but it cannot replace the careful analysis needed before a person decides whether to pursue, defend or settle a dispute.

A practical conclusion

For people researching legal topics, AI can be a helpful place to begin. It can make the law feel less intimidating and help identify the issues that need to be discussed.

But legal research is not the same as legal advice. Before relying on an AI-generated answer, particularly in a live dispute, it is sensible to have the conclusion sanity checked by a solicitor. That check may confirm that the AI has pointed in the right direction. It may also prevent someone from building a case around a principle that sounds persuasive, but does not fit the facts.

The commercial disputes team at Fraser Dawbarns will be very happy to discuss your individual situation with you, and to advise whether what your have researched on AI is actually the best way forward.  Please either complete our enquiry form or contact any of our offices and we’ll be in touch.

How To Contact Us:

To contact a member of our team, you can fill in our online enquiry form, email info@fraserdawbarns.com, or call your nearest office below. If you’d like to speak to a member of our team at one of our offices across Norfolk and Cambridgeshire, visit our offices page.

Wisbech: 01945 461456

March: 01354 602880

King’s Lynn: 01553 666600

Ely: 01353 383483

Downham Market: 01366 383171

This article aims to supply general information, but it is not intended to constitute advice. Every effort is made to ensure that the law referred to is correct at the date of publication and to avoid any statement which may mislead. However, no duty of care is assumed to any person and no liability is accepted for any omission or inaccuracy. Always seek advice specific to your own circumstances. Fraser Dawbarns LLP is always happy to provide such advice.