England's 1,000-year-old legal system -- still steeped in traditions that include wearing wigs and robes -- has taken a cautious step into the future by giving judges permission to use artificial intelligence to help produce rulings. The Courts and Tribunals Judiciary last month said AI could help write opinions but stressed it shouldn't be used for research or legal analyses because the technology can fabricate information and provide misleading, inaccurate and biased information. "Judges do not need to shun the careful use of AI," said Master of the Rolls Geoffrey Vos, the second-highest ranking judge in England and Wales. "But they must ensure that they protect confidence and take full personal responsibility for everything they produce." At a time when scholars and legal experts are pondering a future when AI could replace lawyers, help select jurors or even decide cases, the approach spelled out Dec. 11 by the judiciary is restrained. But for a profession slow to embrace technological change, it's a proactive step as government and industry -- and society in general -- react to a rapidly advancing technology alternately portrayed as a panacea and a menace.

Did you miss a session at the Data Summit? Companies have long sought technologies that promise an advantage in fighting litigation. For most enterprises, casework is a major drain on resources. In 2020, U.S. businesses spent a total of $22.8 billion dollars on litigation; law firm Fulbright & Jaworski estimated in 2005 that nearly 90% of businesses are engaged in some type of litigation and that the average company balances a docket of 37 lawsuits. With the democratization of AI and analytics tools, it was perhaps inevitable that startups would begin applying predictive techniques to the legal field -- particularly given the enormous market opportunity.

In May 2021, Twitter, a platform notorious for abuse and hot-headedness, rolled out a "prompts" feature that suggests users think twice before sending a tweet. The following month, Facebook announced AI "conflict alerts" for groups, so that admins can take action where there may be "contentious or unhealthy conversations taking place." Amazon's Halo, launched in 2020, is a fitness band that monitors the tone of your voice. Wellness is no longer just the tracking of a heartbeat or the counting of steps, but the way we come across to those around us. Algorithmic therapeutic tools are being developed to predict and prevent negative behavior.

In May 2021, Twitter, a platform notorious for abuse and hot-headedness, rolled out a "prompts" feature that suggests users think twice before sending a tweet. The following month, Facebook announced AI "conflict alerts" for groups, so that admins can take action where there may be "contentious or unhealthy conversations taking place." Amazon's Halo, launched in 2020, is a fitness band that monitors the tone of your voice. Wellness is no longer just the tracking of a heartbeat or the counting of steps, but the way we come across to those around us. Algorithmic therapeutic tools are being developed to predict and prevent negative behavior.

In the future, is it conceivable that a firm would be charged with legal malpractice if they didn't use artificial intelligence (AI)? Today, artificial intelligence offers a solution to solve or at least make the access-to-justice issue better and completely transform our traditional legal system. Here's what you need to know about how AI, big data, and online courts will change the legal system. When I sat down in conversation with Richard Susskind, OBE, the world's most-cited author on the future of legal services, to discuss the future of law and lawyers, it became apparent just how much change the legal system will face over the next decade thanks to innovation brought about by artificial intelligence and big data. In Richard's book The Future of Law, published in 1996, he predicted that in the future, lawyers and clients would communicate via email.

Chief Justice of India, Sharad Arvind Bobde on Saturday hinted at the possibility of Artificial Intelligence being developed for the court system while making it clear that it will never replace human discretion. Speaking at an event here, Bobde said, "We have a possibility of developing Artificial Intelligence for the court system. Only for the purpose of ensuring that the undue delay in justice is prevented." "I must make it clear at the outset as there are times when even judges have asked this. AI is not going to replace human judges or human discretion", he added.

Chief Justice of India, Sharad Arvind Bobde on Saturday hinted at the possibility of Artificial Intelligence being developed for the court system while making it clear that it will never replace human discretion. Speaking at an event in Bengaluru, Bobde said, "We have a possibility of developing Artificial Intelligence for the court system. Only for the purpose of ensuring that the undue delay in justice is prevented." "I must make it clear at the outset as there are times when even judges have asked this. AI is not going to replace human judges or human discretion", he added.

Civil court leaders have a newly strong interest in how artificial intelligence can improve the quality and efficiency of legal services in the justice system, especially for problems that self-represented litigants face [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. The promise is that artificial intelligence can address the fundamental crises in courts: that ordinary people are not able to use the system clearly or efficiently; that courts struggle to manage vast amounts of information; and that litigants and judicial officials often have to make complex decisions with little support. If AI is able to gather and sift through vast troves of information, identify patterns, predict optimal strategies, detect anomalies, classify issues, and draft documents, the promise is that these capabilities could be harnessed for making the civil court system more accessible to people. The question then, is how real these promises are, and how they are being implemented and evaluated. Now that early experimentation and agenda-setting have begun, the study of AI as a means for enhancing the quality of justice in the civil court system deserves greater definition.

The centuries-old process of releasing defendants on bail, long the province of judicial discretion, is getting a major assist -- courtesy of artificial intelligence. In late August, Hercules Shepherd Jr. walked up to the stand in a Cleveland courtroom, dressed in an orange jumpsuit. Two nights earlier, an officer had arrested him at a traffic stop with a small bag of cocaine, and he was about to be arraigned. Judge Jimmy Jackson Jr. looked at Shepherd, then down at a computer-generated score on the front of the 18-year-old's case file. The scores marked Shepherd as a prime candidate for pretrial release with low bail.

The centuries-old process of releasing defendants on bail, long the province of judicial discretion, is getting a major assist ... courtesy of artificial intelligence. In late August, Hercules Shepherd Jr. walked up to the stand in a Cleveland courtroom, dressed in an orange jumpsuit. Two nights earlier, an officer had arrested him at a traffic stop with a small bag of cocaine, and he was about to be arraigned. Judge Jimmy Jackson Jr. looked at Shepherd, then down at a computer-generated score on the front of the 18-year-old's case file. The scores marked Shepherd as a prime candidate for pretrial release with low bail.