Do I really need a lawyer to settle my legal dispute?

This question is becoming increasingly common with the introduction and development of Artificial Intelligence (AI) platforms which are now accessible online with the click of a button. A human can type a question or a set of facts into a chat box and receive a response from AI almost immediately.

This begs the question: do you really need to pay for a lawyer when you can get answers online…. in seconds…. for free? It seems like a no brainer.

Unfortunately, these things are not always as simple as they may seem. There is no guarantee that every answer and response produced by AI is accurate and reliable. In fact, we have seen several incidences recently where AI models have provided information that is misleading and sometimes even entirely fabricated. These are known as “hallucinations” and can cause huge issues for litigants in person who are relying on these outputs to represent themselves in a legal dispute claim.

In the case of Harber v Revenue and Customs Commissioners [2023] UKFTT 1007 (TC), Mrs Harber appealed a penalty that she had received from HMRC on the basis that she had a reasonable excuse. Mrs Harber provided the Tribunal with the names, dates and summaries of nine First-tier Tribunal (“FTT”) decisions which supported her case. Unfortunately, these cases were not genuine and had in fact been made up by an AI platform that she had used. A copy of the judgement given in this case can be found here.

Our Dispute Resolution team have seen a recent increase in enquiries from clients who have used AI platforms in replacement of a lawyer to guide them through the litigation process; including preparing correspondence for negotiations and drafting documentation for court proceedings. We have seen several litigants in person being stung in the process, resulting in a significant amount of money and time being spent to rectify issues that have been caused by AI “hallucinations”. Instructing a lawyer from the outset is likely to be far more cost-effective than instructing us later to resolve issues that could have been prevented. Setting things right is likely to be costly and involve additional work such as preparing applications for extensions of time, or filing applications to have previous judgments set aside.

In addition to the risk around “hallucinations” produced by AI platforms, there are huge concerns around the lack of confidentiality and privacy that they offer to users. In a recent interview, Sam Altman (OpenAI’s CEO) compares a sensitive conversation that you might have with ChatGPT to a sensitive conversation that you might have with your doctor or lawyer and states:

“…if you talk to a therapist, or a lawyer, or a doctor about those problems, there is legal privilege for it. There is doctor-patient confidentiality, there’s legal confidentiality… and we haven’t figured that out yet for when you talk to chat GPT. So, if you go talk to ChatGPT about your most sensitive stuff and then there’s a lawsuit, we could be required to produce that”.

The concept of legal privilege protects certain confidential communications, such legal advice that is given from a lawyer to a client, from being disclosed to any third party. There is no such privilege or protection when inputting confidential details into AI platforms, meaning that private conversations can be exposed in legal proceedings.

We would strongly encourage everyone to always take advice from a qualified lawyer with the knowledge and experience to assist in the circumstances. Having a human touch is always helpful when it comes to assessing strategy, cost effectiveness and engaging in negotiation. It is also essential when considering the issues around legal privilege and confidentiality. Whilst AI is impressive, we can’t depend on it for legal advice (yet).

If you find yourself in the midst of a dispute and need assistance, don’t rely on AI!

Instead, please reach out to our experienced Dispute Resolution team.