header-logo header-logo

19 November 2015 / Greg Wildisen
Issue: 7677 / Categories: Opinion
printer mail-detail

Time to get smart(er)

nlj_7677_wildisen

Can artificial intelligence ease legal aid pressure points? Greg Wildisen puts the case for technology

Legal aid was introduced in 1949. At that time nearly 80% of British people were eligible. Recently there have been hefty cuts to the system with another £220m expected to be cut each year until 2018. There is also a hike in the number of people seeking free legal assistance, with some pro bono organisations recording a 50% increase in requests for assistance in 2014–15. This leaves legal aid practitioners with the challenge of having to do more with less—less legal experts available to provide advice, and fewer resources to help with the growing demand to “push paper” around an inefficient system.

Artificial intelligence (AI), often referred to as cognitive computing, takes many forms, but most can be conveniently grouped into three broad areas: robotics; machine learning; and smart apps, previously referred to as expert systems.

Smart apps are technologies that connect complex content and expert analysis of that content to provide precise, immediate answers. These systems rather than being probabilistic

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll