Generative AI has moved quickly from emerging technology to an everyday workplace tool.
Across Australian legal practice, lawyers are experimenting with AI for research, drafting, document review, summarising information and business development. The opportunities are significant, but so are the questions.
How should lawyers verify AI-generated work? What does appropriate supervision look like? How do existing professional obligations apply when new technology becomes part of legal practice?
These issues are explored in GenAI – Ethics and Professional Conduct Issues, an on-demand CPD course available through the College of Law’s CPD Digital Subscription.
The technology is changing. Professional obligations are not.
Much of the public conversation around AI focuses on capability. For lawyers, however, capability is only one part of the discussion. The more important question is often responsibility.
Clients rely on lawyers to exercise judgement, maintain confidentiality and deliver accurate work. Those obligations do not disappear simply because technology is involved.
It’s important to remember that while AI can support legal work, it does not replace professional judgement or the need to verify legal research and other AI-generated material. Lawyers remain accountable for the final product.
Efficiency has value. So does scepticism.
Many practitioners have already discovered that AI can improve efficiency.
Tasks that once consumed substantial amounts of time can often be completed more quickly, allowing lawyers to focus their attention elsewhere. At the same time, legal professionals are trained to test assumptions and question sources.
In the age of AI, one of the most useful habits lawyers can develop is thoughtful scepticism. AI-generated content may appear persuasive, confident and well written, but that does not automatically make it correct.
Professional judgement often begins with asking the same question lawyers have always asked: How do we know this is right?
Confidentiality remains front of mind
For many firms, the first significant AI issue may have little to do with drafting. Instead, it concerns confidentiality.
Lawyers routinely handle sensitive, confidential and privileged information. Before new tools are adopted, practitioners need to understand how information is managed and what safeguards are in place.
Policies, supervision and internal guidance all play a role in helping firms approach AI responsibly.
The enduring value of human judgement
Perhaps the most encouraging aspect of the AI conversation is that it reinforces the value lawyers bring to their clients.
Clients rarely engage lawyers simply to generate information. They engage them to interpret complexity, exercise judgement and navigate risk. All those skills remain distinctly human.
As AI becomes more common, professional judgement may become even more valuable because clients will continue to need trusted advisers who can evaluate information rather than simply produce it.
Practitioners who would like to explore these issues in greater depth can access GenAI – Ethics and Professional Conduct Issues, a 60-minute on-demand CPD course worth 1 CPD point.
It is available through the College of Law’s CPD Digital Subscription, which provides 12 months of unlimited access to more than 150 hours of on-demand content, including programs from the College of Law’s leading innovative think tank, the Centre for Legal Innovation.