Samuel Berkeley is currently in his second of four seats as a trainee at Goughs Solicitors, where he is encouraged to use AI responsibly. He argues that AI is not a threat to solicitors; it’s the profession’s best chance to evolve.

The legal profession asks the wrong question about Artificial Intelligence. The persistent debate over whether tools like ChatGPT will replace solicitors is, at best, a distraction. At worst, it risks slowing the profession’s ability to adapt to a structural shift already underway.

AI is not a substitute for legal expertise; it’s a catalyst for transformation. Law firms are becoming technology-enabled businesses, and those failing to recognise this risk being left behind.

AI is an enabler, not a replacement

AI is already reshaping how legal work is delivered. From document review to drafting, due diligence to research, technology reduces time spent on repetitive, process-heavy tasks. It’s not eliminating solicitors; it’s augmenting their capabilities.

Used responsibly, AI removes friction. It focuses solicitors on areas where human judgment is indispensable: strategic advice, nuanced negotiation, and client advocacy – the core of what gives solicitors value and what can’t be automated away.

In my Commercial Property seat I have developed a controlled, sophisticated and accurate Microsoft Copilot Agent to assist with lease reviewing, not to replace traditional reviewing but to prepare an initial report to be checked over.

For example, in my Commercial Property seat I have developed a controlled, sophisticated and accurate Microsoft Copilot Agent to assist with lease reviewing, not to replace traditional reviewing but to prepare an initial report to be checked over. By anonymising all information and treating outputs as provisional, the tool helped streamline the process and reduce time spent on procedural explanations, allowing greater focus on commercial judgement, accuracy, and risk management.

When in my Family Law seat I often observed litigants in person relying on AI. The AI-derived outputs were often clearer and more structured than would otherwise have been possible without legal assistance. However the outputs were far less accurate, which reinforces the need for an experienced solicitor’s input.

Getting real about the tangible benefits to clients

For clients, efficiency, consistency and accuracy are immediately achievable through effective AI integration. By streamlining administrative tasks, solicitors can support clients more efficiently, particularly with time sensitive issues.

However, its true value lies in supporting, not replacing, professional judgment. The role of the solicitor remains central in ensuring accuracy, legal reasoning, and tailored advice.

Professional accountability and responsibility

A key misconception is that AI dilutes professional responsibility. The opposite is true.

Regulatory requirements imposed by the SRA have never been more stringent in response to technological change.

Duties of ethics and competence apply regardless of the tools used. Solicitors remain accountable for advice they provide and the outcomes delivered. This places an obligation on firms to ensure AI is governed, verified and supervised, so that clients are protected.

The risks: hallucinations, privacy, and overreliance

Caution is essential, AI is not infallible and “hallucinations” are always a risk. It’s clear the consequences for solicitors are serious. Privacy and data security challenges mean AI tools must comply with confidentiality obligations when handling client data.

In my view, however, the main risk is overreliance. AI is only as effective as the prompts and oversight applied to its outputs. Poorly framed queries and insufficient review will lead to flawed results, similar perhaps to work drafted by junior solicitors.

Poorly framed queries and insufficient review will lead to flawed results, similar perhaps to work drafted by junior solicitors.

This means human oversight is paramount since AI is an efficiency tool rather than a decision maker.

For example, a solicitor may use AI to generate a first draft before reviewing, refining, and verifying the content themselves. When supervised, this improves efficiency, ensuring the final product exceeds professional standards.

Adapt or fall behind

An evolving trend among leading firms is the development of private, secure AI platforms tailored for legal use. For example, the Jylo platform signals a controlled and compliant shift toward AI.

These systems are trained on firm-specific data embedded within secure environments that align with professional standards. At the same time, competitive pressures are forcing firms to reconsider traditional operating models and investment priorities.

Law firms remain predominantly privately owned professional partnerships where maximising short-term revenue and profit is often in the best interest of those with the greatest influence on spending.

Firms that rely on low-margin, commoditised work without embracing automation and AI-driven efficiencies are facing a narrowing path.

I predict the emergence of firms, perhaps those that have taken public or private equity, or are spun out of VC-backed LegalTech enterprises, that will challenge larger and entrenched firms that neglect investment into AI programmes.

In my mind, the two paths are clear. Firms that rely on low-margin, commoditised work without embracing automation and AI-driven efficiencies are facing a narrowing path.

As clients demand faster and more cost-effective services, traditional firms will come under increasing pressure, especially when considering that those same clients are most likely incorporating AI within their businesses already.

By contrast, firms that integrate AI thoughtfully, combining technological capability with human expertise, will be better positioned to compete, delivering higher value and efficient services in response to client needs.

Visit

Goughs Solicitors

Connect with Samuel Berkeley via LinkedIn