header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
16 August 2019 / David Christie
Categories: Profession , Features , Technology , Training & education
printer mail-detail

Course of action

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
David Christie explains how understanding and harnessing the development of technology in legal practice is far from academic
  • Defining ‘legal tech’: changing the practice of law.
  • Looking through the student’s eyes.
  • Reflection: have the goals been achieved?

Every day, developments in technology are reported on social media feeds—and emails from law firms announce new methods of using a new technology or a new process which harnesses new, emerging opportunities. Teaching students about the practice of law in this flowing river of news is difficult. Moreover, it’s not only the river which changes each time we step into it, but ourselves. Understanding the changes (in order to teach them) brings out new ideas and new questions about some fundamental points of practice.  

There are different ways to deal with this. The approach with our module on Legal Tech at the Law School, Robert Gordon University, aimed at students in the Postgraduate Diploma in Legal Practice (the Scottish equivalent of the Legal Practice Course) has anchored itself with two prongs. The first is working

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Freeths—Rachel Crosier

Projects and rail practices strengthened by director hire in London

DWF—Stephen Hickling

DWF—Stephen Hickling

Real estate team in Birmingham welcomes back returning partner

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Ward Hadaway—44 appointments

Firm invests in national growth with 44 appointments across five offices

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: 40 years on, has PACE lost its edge?
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 transformed criminal justice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ed Cape of UWE and Matthew Hardcastle and Sandra Paul of Kingsley Napley trace its ‘seismic impact’
NLJ this week: Stress-testing the City
Operational resilience is no longer optional. Writing in NLJ this week, Emma Radmore and Michael Lewis of Womble Bond Dickinson explain how UK regulators expect firms to identify ‘important business services’ that could cause ‘intolerable levels of harm’ if disrupted
NLJ this week: How sure is ‘sure’ enough?
Criminal juries may be convicting—or acquitting—on a misunderstanding. Writing in NLJ this week Paul McKeown, Adrian Keane and Sally Stares of The City Law School and LSE report troubling survey findings on the meaning of ‘sure’
NLJ this week: A deferred prosecution reprieve
The Serious Fraud Office (SFO) has narrowly preserved a key weapon in its anti-corruption arsenal. In this week's NLJ, Jonathan Fisher KC of Red Lion Chambers examines Guralp Systems Ltd v SFO, in which the High Court ruled that a deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) remained in force despite the company’s failure to disgorge £2m by the stated deadline
NLJ this week: Mandelson, Epstein & the court of popular opinion
As the drip-feed of Epstein disclosures fuels ‘collateral damage’, the rush to cry misconduct in public office may be premature. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke of Hill Dickinson warns that the offence is no catch-all for political embarrassment. It demands a ‘grave departure’ from proper standards, an ‘abuse of the public’s trust’ and conduct ‘sufficiently serious to warrant criminal punishment’
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll