header-logo header-logo

26 April 2024
Issue: 8068 / Categories: Legal News , Profession , Property , Conveyancing , Artificial intelligence , Technology
printer mail-detail

NLJ this week: Conveyancing needs more tech

169179

Artificial intelligence (AI) could be a valuable tool for residential property lawyers, writes Peter Ambrose in this week’s NLJ

Ambrose, owner and managing director of The Partnership and Legalito, points out: ‘When it comes to driving technology innovation, residential conveyancing tends to take a bit of a back seat.’ He asserts that it’s time this changed.

One argument in favour of more tech in conveyancing, he writes, is that ‘risk management is among the biggest benefit offered by technology, and conveyancing is the discipline that carries the most risk today’.

Ambrose identifies aspects where tech could improve the process, and explains what difference it could make.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

NLJ Career Profile: Maryam Syed KC, Church Court Chambers

From childhood dreams of the Bar to some of the country's most challenging cases, Maryam Syed KC explains why she has never stopped standing up for others

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft—Richard Breavington, Rachel Ford & Daniel Guilfoyle

DAC Beachcroft significantly expands Cyber team, hiring three Cyber partners

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson—Professor Clive Kay

Browne Jacobson appoints senior healthcare leader Professor Clive Kay as strategic adviser

NEWS
As family justice moves further away from the courtroom, collaborative law is emerging as an increasingly important route to resolving separation disputes
A busy period for employment law is producing important lessons for employers, employees and tribunals alike
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners

Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.

How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct? 
back-to-top-scroll