Summarization of legal judgments poses a heavy cognitive burden on law practitioners due to the complexity of the language, context-sensitive legal jargon, and the length of the document. Therefore, the automatic summarization of legal documents has attracted serious attention from natural language processing researchers. Since the abstractive summaries of legal documents generated by deep neural methods remain prone to the risk of misrepresenting nuanced legal jargon or overlooking key contextual details, we envisage a rising trend toward the use of extractive case summarizers. Given the high cost of human annotation for gold standard extractive summaries, we engineer a light and transparent pipeline that leverages existing abstractive gold standard summaries to create the corresponding extractive gold standard versions. The approach ensures that the experts` opinions ensconced in the original gold standard abstractive summaries are carried over to the transformed extractive summaries. We aim to augment seven existing case summarization datasets, which include abstractive summaries, by incorporating corresponding extractive summaries and create an enriched data resource for case summarization research community. To ensure the quality of the augmented extractive summaries, we perform an extensive comparative evaluation with the original abstractive gold standard summaries covering structural, lexical, and semantic dimensions. We also compare the domain-level information of the two summaries. We commit to release the augmented datasets in the public domain for use by the research community and believe that the resource will offer opportunities to advance the field of automatic summarization of legal documents.

Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) integrates large language models (LLMs) with external sources, but unresolved contradictions in retrieved evidence often lead to hallucinations and legally unsound outputs. Benchmarks currently used for contradiction detection lack domain realism, cover only limited conflict types, and rarely extend beyond single-sentence pairs, making them unsuitable for legal applications. Controlled generation of documents with embedded contradictions is therefore essential: it enables systematic stress-testing of models, ensures coverage of diverse conflict categories, and provides a reliable basis for evaluating contradiction detection and resolution. We present a multi-agent contradiction-aware benchmark framework for the legal domain that generates synthetic legal-style documents, injects six structured contradiction types, and models both self- and pairwise inconsistencies. Automated contradiction mining is combined with human-in-the-loop validation to guarantee plausibility and fidelity. This benchmark offers one of the first structured resources for contradiction-aware evaluation in legal RAG pipelines, supporting more consistent, interpretable, and trustworthy systems.

Abstract--This study examines the application of artificial intelligence (AI) and large language models (LLM) to improve access to legal texts in Senegal's judicial system. The emphasis is on the difficulties of extracting and organizing legal documents, highlighting the need for better access to judicial information. The research successfully extracted 7,967 articles from various legal documents, particularly focusing on the Land and Public Domain Code. A detailed graph database was developed, which contains 2,872 nodes and 10,774 relationships, aiding in the visualization of interconnections within legal texts. In addition, advanced triple extraction techniques were utilized for knowledge, demonstrating the effectiveness of models such as GPT - 4o, GPT -4, and Mistral-Large in identifying relationships and relevant metadata. Through these technologies, the aim is to create a solid framework that allows Senegalese citizens and legal professionals to more effectively understand their rights and responsibilities. Artificial intelligence (AI) is a transformative technology that raises significant ethical considerations regarding its use. Initiatives like Microsoft's "AI for Humanitarian Action" and Google's "AI for Social Good" focus on enhancing jurisprudence and human rights [1]. Moreover, the Center for Social Good Data Science at the University of Chicago applies AI to improve criminal justice systems.

Legal documents pose unique challenges for text classification due to their domain-specific language and often limited labeled data. This paper proposes a hybrid approach for classifying legal texts by combining unsupervised topic and graph embeddings with a supervised model. We employ Top2Vec to learn semantic document embeddings and automatically discover latent topics, and Node2Vec to capture structural relationships via a bipartite graph of legal documents. The embeddings are combined and clustered using KMeans, yielding coherent groupings of documents. Our computations on a legal document dataset demonstrate that the combined Top2Vec+Node2Vec approach improves clustering quality over text-only or graph-only embeddings. We conduct a sensitivity analysis of hyperparameters, such as the number of clusters and the dimensionality of the embeddings, and demonstrate that our method achieves competitive performance against baseline Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA) and Non-Negative Matrix Factorization (NMF) models. Key findings indicate that while the pipeline presents an innovative approach to unsupervised legal document analysis by combining semantic topic modeling with graph embedding techniques, its efficacy is contingent upon the quality of initial topic generation and the representational power of the chosen embedding models for specialized legal language. Strategic recommendations include the exploration of domain-specific embeddings, more comprehensive hyperparameter tuning for Node2Vec, dynamic determination of cluster numbers, and robust human-in-the-loop validation processes to enhance legal relevance and trustworthiness. The pipeline demonstrates potential for exploratory legal data analysis and as a precursor to supervised learning tasks but requires further refinement and domain-specific adaptation for practical legal applications.

Despite advances in legal NLP, no comprehensive evaluation covering multiple legal-specific LLMs currently exists for contract classification tasks in contract understanding. To address this gap, we present an evaluation of 10 legal-specific LLMs on three English language contract understanding tasks and compare them with 7 general-purpose LLMs. The results show that legal-specific LLMs consistently outperform general-purpose models, especially on tasks requiring nuanced legal understanding. Legal-BERT and Contracts-BERT establish new SOTAs on two of the three tasks, despite having 69% fewer parameters than the best-performing general-purpose LLM. We also identify CaseLaw-BERT and LexLM as strong additional baselines for contract understanding. Our results provide a holistic evaluation of legal-specific LLMs and will facilitate the development of more accurate contract understanding systems.

Legal precedent retrieval is a cornerstone of the common law system, governed by the principle of stare decisis, which demands consistency in judicial decisions. However, the growing complexity and volume of legal documents challenge traditional retrieval methods. TraceRetriever mirrors real-world legal search by operating with limited case information, extracting only rhetorically significant segments instead of requiring complete documents. Our pipeline integrates BM25, Vector Database, and Cross-Encoder models, combining initial results through Reciprocal Rank Fusion before final re-ranking. Rhetorical annotations are generated using a Hierarchical BiLSTM CRF classifier trained on Indian judgments. Evaluated on IL-PCR and COLIEE 2025 datasets, TraceRetriever addresses growing document volume challenges while aligning with practical search constraints, reliable and scalable foundation for precedent retrieval enhancing legal research when only partial case knowledge is available.

Legal document summarization represents a significant advancement towards improving judicial efficiency through the automation of key information detection. Our approach leverages state-of-the-art natural language processing techniques to meticulously identify and extract essential data from extensive legal texts, which facilitates a more efficient review process. By employing advanced machine learning algorithms, the framework recognizes underlying patterns within judicial documents to create precise summaries that encapsulate the crucial elements. This automation alleviates the burden on legal professionals, concurrently reducing the likelihood of overlooking vital information that could lead to errors. Through comprehensive experiments conducted with actual legal datasets, we demonstrate the capability of our method to generate high-quality summaries while preserving the integrity of the original content and enhancing processing times considerably. The results reveal marked improvements in operational efficiency, allowing legal practitioners to direct their efforts toward critical analytical and decision-making activities instead of manual reviews. This research highlights promising technology-driven strategies that can significantly alter workflow dynamics within the legal sector, emphasizing the role of automation in refining judicial processes.

The judiciary, as one of democracy's three pillars, is dealing with a rising amount of legal issues, needing careful use of judicial resources. This research presents a complex framework that leverages Data Science methodologies, notably Large Language Models (LLM) and Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) techniques, to improve the efficiency of analyzing Calcutta High Court verdicts. Our framework focuses on two key aspects: first, the creation of a robust summarization mechanism that distills complex legal texts into concise and coherent summaries; and second, the development of an intelligent system for retrieving similar cases, which will assist legal professionals in research and decision making. By fine-tuning the Pegasus model using case head note summaries, we achieve significant improvements in the summarization of legal cases. Our two-step summarizing technique preserves crucial legal contexts, allowing for the production of a comprehensive vector database for RAG. The RAG-powered framework efficiently retrieves similar cases in response to user queries, offering thorough overviews and summaries. This technique not only improves legal research efficiency, but it also helps legal professionals and students easily acquire and grasp key legal information, benefiting the overall legal scenario.

The extraction of information about traffic accidents from legal documents is crucial for quantifying insurance company costs. Extracting entities such as percentages of physical and/or psychological disability and the involved compensation amounts is a challenging process, even for experts, due to the subtle arguments and reasoning in the court decision. A two-step procedure is proposed: first, segmenting the document identifying the most relevant segments, and then extracting the entities. For text segmentation, two methodologies are compared: a classic method based on regular expressions and a second approach that divides the document into blocks of n-tokens, which are then vectorized using multilingual models for semantic searches (text-embedding-ada-002/MiniLM-L12-v2 ). Subsequently, large language models (LLaMA-2 7b, 70b, LLaMA-3 8b, and GPT-4 Turbo) are applied with prompting to the selected segments for entity extraction. For the LLaMA models, fine-tuning is performed using LoRA. LLaMA-2 7b, even with zero temperature, shows a significant number of hallucinations in extractions which are an important contention point for named entity extraction. This work shows that these hallucinations are substantially reduced after finetuning the model. The performance of the methodology based on segment vectorization and subsequent use of LLMs significantly surpasses the classic method which achieves an accuracy of 39.5%. Among open-source models, LLaMA-2 70B with finetuning achieves the highest accuracy 79.4%, surpassing its base version 61.7%. Notably, the base LLaMA-3 8B model already performs comparably to the finetuned LLaMA-2 70B model, achieving 76.6%, highlighting the rapid progress in model development. Meanwhile, GPT-4 Turbo achieves the highest accuracy at 86.1%.

This paper presents BR-TaxQA-R, a novel dataset designed to support question answering with references in the context of Brazilian personal income tax law. The dataset contains 715 questions from the 2024 official Q&A document published by Brazil's Internal Revenue Service, enriched with statutory norms and administrative rulings from the Conselho Administrativo de Recursos Fiscais (CARF). We implement a Retrieval-Augmented Generation (RAG) pipeline using OpenAI embeddings for searching and GPT-4o-mini for answer generation. We compare different text segmentation strategies and benchmark our system against commercial tools such as ChatGPT and Perplexity.ai using RAGAS-based metrics. Results show that our custom RAG pipeline outperforms commercial systems in Response Relevancy, indicating stronger alignment with user queries, while commercial models achieve higher scores in Factual Correctness and fluency . These findings highlight a trade-off between legally grounded generation and linguistic fluency. Crucially, we argue that human expert evaluation remains essential to ensure the legal validity of AI-generated answers in high-stakes domains such as taxation.