City law firm successfully pilots AI technology

International firm Reed Smith expects to make greater use of artificial intelligence technology for transactional work following a successful pilot in its London office.

After using AI technology for a real estate matter, chief knowledge officer Lucy Dillon (pictured) said the firm will definitely be using it again.

Advertisement

‘I think we will be using [the technology] more widely as it lends itself to any transaction where you are reviewing large reams of documents,’ she added.

The firm tested a ‘cognitive computing platform’ developed by software provider RAVN Systems. The software was used to read, interpret and extract key provisions from a client’s leases. It then produced a review identifying higher-risk leases that required further inspection.

The platform was used for a case the firm had already worked on, enabling the team to know whether the technology worked.

Recalling use of a similar tool at her previous firm, Dillon said: ‘What the lawyers told me was that, at the beginning, they were very careful to check everything. But as they got used to how the tool worked, they were checking less and less because they were very confident with what the tool was doing and that it was extracting the correct information.’

The use of AI technology in law firms will become the norm, Dillon predicted.

‘For the type of work we do, where we are reviewing large swaths of documents for clients, clients are driving the price,’ she said. ‘What we need to do is balance up the costs and accuracy versus against having lots of people doing that work.’

However, Dillon insists AI technology will not replace lawyers.

’This is moving a step up,’ she said. ‘Rather than reviewing documents, we’re checking what the reviewer has done. It just so happens the reviewer is a piece of technology.

‘Technology is by no means perfect. If you talk to any provider they will say it’s a machine – you teach it to do something, it will do it. But it has no sophistication in seeing nuance. That’s why you still need a lawyer.’

Let's block ads! (Why?)

City law firm successfully pilots AI technology

Women and BAME hopefuls offered coaching to reach judiciary

The judiciary has announced support programmes for helping women and ethnic minorities onto the bench.

The Judicial Diversity Committee will make 30 places available on the course, limited to candidates from areas currently under-represented: women, black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) candidates and those from a less-advantaged background.

Advertisement

The aim is to have candidates better prepared for the High Court judge selection process starting in the new year. The Judicial Appointments Commission hopes to begin this process in January 2017 for vacancies in all three divisions (Queen’s Bench, Family and Chancery).

The programme for potential candidates will involve an intensive one-day workshop on the process itself and the chance to shadow a judge in the High Court.

A judiciary spokesman said: ‘The programme is intended to help candidates make a stronger application to the High Court selection exercise; but once they have completed the programme, they will have to compete on merit with the other applicants for High Court appointment.’

Applications close at midnight on 11 September and candidates will be notified within two weeks.

The lord chief justice has said he is committed to ensuring ‘principles of equality and fair treatment’ apply to all aspects of judicial life.

But the judiciary has come under greater pressure in recent months to make tangible progress in encouraging more diversity among the higher echelons of the profession.

Tottenham MP David Lammy, who is leading a government review of racial bias in the criminal justice system, has told the Gazette his study will focus on judicial diversity.

The percentage of court judges who identify as BAME has fallen in the last year, while the number of female Court of Appeal judges remains the same as last year, at eight out of 39. In the High Court, 22 of 106 judges are women, compared with 21 last year.

The JAC has stated it does not use positive discrimination but instead has a policy of selecting a candidate for the purposes of increasing diversity only where two or more candidates are of equal merit.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Women and BAME hopefuls offered coaching to reach judiciary

Leading firms ‘tend to move older partners aside’

Older partners at bigger law firms are likely to be moved aside to make room for younger colleagues who are promoted earlier than their counterparts at smaller firms, according to latest sector research.

Law firm management consultancy Edward Drummond says leading law firms are ‘aggressively meritocratic’.

Advertisement

Its research, published yesterday, found that 72% of partners at the UK’s top 10 law firms are aged 50 or under, whereas this is only the case for 60% of partners at UK firms overall.

Partners at top-10 law firms are, on average, almost two years younger than the national sector average.

Edward Drummond said leading law firms are ‘aggressively meritocratic so top talent tends to be promoted earlier, and older partners also tend to be moved aside more pro-actively to make room for younger partners or as their income generation slows’.

The consultancy states this is a good opportunity for smaller, mid-tier firms to hire experienced partners who do not want to retire early.

However it warns that some prospective new partners may overestimate their ability to bring clients with them.

Edward Drummond partner Gareth Ward (pictured) said: ‘Sometimes there can be a disconnect between what the firm thinks they’re hiring, based on what partners believe they can deliver, and the reality.

‘Top firms usually manage their partners’ exits very carefully, ensuring that relationships with existing clients remain institutional rather than personal.

‘Partners’ ability to bring clients with them when they move on can often be highly restricted.’    

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Leading firms ‘tend to move older partners aside’

City law firm successfully pilots AI technology

International firm Reed Smith expects to make greater use of artificial intelligence technology for transactional work following a successful pilot in its London office.

After using AI technology for a real estate matter, chief knowledge officer Lucy Dillon (pictured) said the firm will definitely be using it again.

Advertisement

‘I think we will be using [the technology] more widely as it lends itself to any transaction where you are reviewing large reams of documents,’ she added.

The firm tested a ‘cognitive computing platform’ developed by software provider RAVN Systems. The software was used to read, interpret and extract key provisions from a client’s leases. It then produced a review identifying higher-risk leases that required further inspection.

The platform was used for a case the firm had already worked on, enabling the team to know whether the technology worked.

Recalling use of a similar tool at her previous firm, Dillon said: ‘What the lawyers told me was that, at the beginning, they were very careful to check everything. But as they got used to how the tool worked, they were checking less and less because they were very confident with what the tool was doing and that it was extracting the correct information.’

The use of AI technology in law firms will become the norm, Dillon predicted.

‘For the type of work we do, where we are reviewing large swaths of documents for clients, clients are driving the price,’ she said. ‘What we need to do is balance up the costs and accuracy versus against having lots of people doing that work.’

However, Dillon insists AI technology will not replace lawyers.

’This is moving a step up,’ she said. ‘Rather than reviewing documents, we’re checking what the reviewer has done. It just so happens the reviewer is a piece of technology.

‘Technology is by no means perfect. If you talk to any provider they will say it’s a machine – you teach it to do something, it will do it. But it has no sophistication in seeing nuance. That’s why you still need a lawyer.’

Let's block ads! (Why?)

City law firm successfully pilots AI technology

Leading firms ‘tend to move older partners aside’

Older partners at bigger law firms are likely to be moved aside to make room for younger colleagues who are promoted earlier than their counterparts at smaller firms, according to latest sector research.

Law firm management consultancy Edward Drummond says leading law firms are ‘aggressively meritocratic’.

Advertisement

Its research, published yesterday, found that 72% of partners at the UK’s top 10 law firms are aged 50 or under, whereas this is only the case for 60% of partners at UK firms overall.

Partners at top-10 law firms are, on average, almost two years younger than the national sector average.

Edward Drummond said leading law firms are ‘aggressively meritocratic so top talent tends to be promoted earlier, and older partners also tend to be moved aside more pro-actively to make room for younger partners or as their income generation slows’.

The consultancy states this is a good opportunity for smaller, mid-tier firms to hire experienced partners who do not want to retire early.

However it warns that some prospective new partners may overestimate their ability to bring clients with them.

Edward Drummond partner Gareth Ward said: ‘Sometimes there can be a disconnect between what the firm thinks they’re hiring, based on what partners believe they can deliver, and the reality.

‘Top firms usually manage their partners’ exits very carefully, ensuring that relationships with existing clients remain institutional rather than personal.

‘Partners’ ability to bring clients with them when they move on can often be highly restricted.’    

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Leading firms ‘tend to move older partners aside’

Women and BAME hopefuls offered coaching to reach judiciary

The judiciary has announced support programmes for helping women and ethnic minorities onto the bench.

The Judicial Diversity Committee will make 30 places available on the course, limited to candidates from areas currently under-represented: women, black, Asian and minority ethnic (BAME) candidates and those from a less-advantaged background.

Advertisement

The aim is to have candidates better prepared for the High Court judge selection process starting in the new year. The Judicial Appointments Commission hopes to begin this process in January 2017 for vacancies in all three divisions (Queen’s Bench, Family and Chancery).

The programme for potential candidates will involve an intensive one-day workshop on the process itself and the chance to shadow a judge in the High Court.

A judiciary spokesman said: ‘The programme is intended to help candidates make a stronger application to the High Court selection exercise; but once they have completed the programme, they will have to compete on merit with the other applicants for High Court appointment.’

Applications close at midnight on 11 September and candidates will be notified within two weeks.

The lord chief justice has said he is committed to ensuring ‘principles of equality and fair treatment’ apply to all aspects of judicial life.

But the judiciary has come under greater pressure in recent months to make tangible progress in encouraging more diversity among the higher echelons of the profession.

Tottenham MP David Lammy, who is leading a government review of racial bias in the criminal justice system, has told the Gazette his study will focus on judicial diversity.

The percentage of court judges who identify as BAME has fallen in the last year, while the number of female Court of Appeal judges remains the same as last year, at eight out of 39. In the High Court, 22 of 106 judges are women, compared with 21 last year.

The JAC has stated it does not use positive discrimination but instead has a policy of selecting a candidate for the purposes of increasing diversity only where two or more candidates are of equal merit.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Women and BAME hopefuls offered coaching to reach judiciary

Solicitor faces £46k prosecution bill despite charges being found unproven

A solicitor cleared of three allegations related to borrowing from the Axiom legal fund has nevertheless been ordered to pay the costs of investigating him.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal found charges against Jason Libby could not be proved, after his firm had accepted £456,108 in funding from the ultimately doomed fund in 2012.

Advertisement

But the tribunal said it had ‘some sympathy’ with the Solicitors Regulation Authority’s assertion that Libby, who ran Devon firm Drake Legal Limited, ‘had brought proceedings on himself’. 

It ordered him to pay both the investigation costs and half the costs of July’s four-day hearing – a total of £46,577. Libby had already spent £60,000 on defence costs since the SRA started investigating him four years ago.

‘Although the allegations had not been proved to the required standard that was not to say [his] conduct was entirely blameless,’ said the tribunal.

The regulator alleged it had been improper to take out the financing deal as Libby knew or was reckless to the fact his firm had not complied with the terms of a litigation funding agreement.

The SRA also alleged he had no intention to repay the money in time, misused funds, failed to do background checks on investment managers and placed his firm at risk.

The tribunal heard Libby, a solicitor for almost 15 years, ‘shut his eyes and ears to the obvious’ about how the fund, which attracted more than £100m from investors to finance legal cases and has led to a string of strike-offs for some of those solicitors involved, was being run.

Libby said he had sought finance to expand his practice, and at the time he was offered the terms he already had 100 cases in the pipeline.

The terms of the agreement restricted the use of money to disbursements in respect of a claim, and any advances were required to be repaid within 12 months. Drake ultimately borrowed £456,108 and was liable to repay £716,400 plus interest.

Libby admitted to the tribunal he was not a ‘textbook solicitor’ but insisted he had found no ‘red flags’ to suggest anything untoward with Axiom or its investment managers.

He regarded the funding arrangement as a viable proposition and was confident he could make a success of the arrangement.

Had he known the fund was going to crash, he added, he would not have signed the agreement. He confirmed to the tribunal he is in the process of repaying a total of £215,000, of which he had paid up to £140,000.

The tribunal found Libby could have taken greater care to ensure he was not in breach of the agreement, but that this carelessness was not deliberate. He had set a ‘realistic’ timeframe for repaying the loan and the tribunal was not satisfied he knew or was reckless to the fact the money was being used for other purposes than agreed.

‘[Libby] believed, albeit erroneously, that he was complying with the LFA,’ added the tribunal.

Libby was cleared of having known or been aware of any fraudulent activity, and it was accepted he would not have entered an agreement if he perceived there to be a risk of fraud.

‘While there had certainly been errors and examples of carelessness, the tribunal did not find that individually or cumulatively they amounted to a lack of integrity,’ the SDT judgment said.

The tribunal was not satisfied this was an ‘obviously dubious transaction’ or that Libby had ‘closed his eyes and ears’.

Two further allegations, relating to failing to pay money into a client account and failing to run his firm effectively, were also found not proved.

Libby’s lawyers said the second of these charges had the ‘unmistakable hallmark of a sweep-up, catch-all allegation in case the other allegations should fail’.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

Solicitor faces £46k prosecution bill despite charges being found unproven