Trending: Call for Papers Volume 4 | Issue 3: International Journal of Advanced Legal Research [ISSN: 2582-7340]



Artificial Intelligence (AI) as defined by John McCarthy (father of Artificial Intelligence) is the science and engineering of making intelligent machines. It also defined the intellectual human behavior. We can define AI as basically a computer program that includes algorithm and it work according to a human mind. Examples of AI are Digital assistants, E-Payments, Text editor or auto-correct and many more applications are there. AI was adopted by most of the countries and others are in the process to adopt the same. AI was used in different sectors such as healthcare, communication, transport, education, software industry and etc.

In this paper I m going to discuss about the use of AI in the field of law. AI when used in legal field by lawyers, judges, researchers will help them a lot. Here is an attempt to discuss the issues related to the use of AI in future in the field of law such as will generally be a reduced demand for law degrees in future? Will robotics and machines are going to replace the Judges completely? Whether any law can be going to form for the regulation of AI in India as many authors said that there is no law for the regulation of AI. Whether AI will prove to be effective if we use it to provide Justice?


Artificial intelligence was first defined by the Father of AI Prof. John McCarthy as “Science and engineering of making intelligent machine, especially intelligent computer program”. For today’s era we can define AI as the “Study and design of intelligent agents” where an intelligent agent(machine) takes order and fulfill task provided to them successfully.

AI works with a lot of information which is first joined with quick iterative preparing and keep calculation that permit the framework to gain from the example inside the information. Thusly, the framework would have the option to convey precise or hear exact yields. As it sounds, AI is a huge subject which includes much progressed and complex cycles, and thus it fields of study in corporate numerous speculation, strategies and innovation.

Nowadays, many fields adopted or in the process to adopt AI. For e.g. In medical field AI is used to discover links between genetic codes, to power surgical Robots or even to maximize hospital effectiveness. And it is also used in efficient diagnose and reduce error. In the field of engineering AI is a widely used to data extraction and analysis. And now even in the field of aviation AI is used and now we are ready to fly without a Human pilot.

Some examples of human AI are Siri which is an Apple’s personal assistant, Tesla, it is a one of the best cars ever made, Inter team chat tools, National language processing tools, Automates Financial investing, virtual travel booking agent and many more.

AI now start making his. Place in the field of Law. AI is adopted by many law schools to find case laws, research papers, articles, citations etc. It is very helpful for the Law student to identify the relevant matter from a large data. But can AI will able to replace human courts and human judges? Will the demand of law profession is going to be reduce? Is there any law in India to regulate AI? These questions are going to be deal in the further paper.

The first benefit of law after AI or humans overrule is AI can handle big data. Due to large populations sometimes we miss critical features of the populations that give biased results at the time of examining the relationship among variables.

The second benefit of law after AI or humans overrule is the ability of AI to find connection in big or large data. It is possible that law school focus its data grouping energy in regions where it as of now used as standards, with an eye on transforming them over to rules. Both coordinated and unstructured solicitations can deliver new testable theories. Exactly when this iterative communication transforms into impasse, law continue using its free standards likewise rough rules. A large part of the time in any case, the examination of good data will lead to another standard, a fixing of a norm, or a change form a standard to a norm.


Hence the major challenge that the law system and courts will be replaced by the Artificial Intelligence or software? AI starts making his place in the field of law for example public prices once set by agencies (like petrol prices) and then further regulated by the algorithms. Block chain agreements are starting to offer an elective component to contract law for the producing of enforceable arrangements. AI already starts playing a role in sentencing and bail determinations.

Now the question is that will AI replace the lawyers and judges soon? Some may think in this way, yet at numerous focuses in Anglo American lawful history, courts have been thought old, just to primary maintain their job. There are it ends up focal points to arbitration as a type of social requesting that are hard to reproduce by any known means. This paper predicts, even in regions in which software or AI has started to govern that human courts will preserve or be fundamentally reexamined. It predicts, nonetheless that human machine crossover will be the first supplant for human just overall sets of laws, and proposes, whenever done right that there lies genuine guarantee in that approach.

Software has more advantage in the legal field because machines are able to handle billions of cases tirelessly at a time whereas a human court decide a single case and there is no chances of imperfection of law enforcement by software while there is a chance of imperfection by the human courts.

But human courts have their own advantages. It would chance shame to content that machines won’t ever have the option to settle on or clarify contemplated choices in a lawful setting, yet the difficulties confronted are not insignificant or effectively finished and regardless of whether programming improves at understanding in the subtleties of language, it might in any case confront the more profound, jurisprudential difficulties described here. That proposes that for a long time to come programming frameworks that intend to supplant frameworks of social requesting will succeed best as human-machine crossover, blending scale and viability in with human adjudication for hard cases.

  • iscovery a mechanized examination of electronic data for disclosure before the beginning of a court E-Discovery utilizes AI simulated intelligence, which learns through preparing what the best calculation is that is equipped for separating the significant parts from a lot of data. Parties concur which search terms and coding they use. The adjudicator evaluates and affirm the understanding. This is a strategy for report examination perceived by the courts in the United States and the United Kingdom2.

Efficiency, consistence and access to justice are the three primary benefit of AI law suggested by the advocates. As to Judiciary is similar not that costly and it seems like cash all around spent in saving the voice of the people in the field of the law that oversees them. A robotized legal executive may be quicker, however the legitimate differences that emerge from circuit parts and contradiction may really be helpful for society in that they connect with the lawful local area in extended conversations about different sides of significant lawful issues. Efficiency is not generally foremost in principle of law, for the “law of detachment of powers” was embraced by the convention of 1787 not to elevate efficiency yet to block the activity of self-assertive force and by for instance embracing AI research devices or an AI research devices

  1. Anti-monopoly v. Hasbro Inc., 958 F. Supp. 895 (S.D.N.Y. 1997)
  2. Supp.= federal Supplement; S.D.N.Y.=Southern District of New York

or an AI staff lawyer, a few efficiency advantages could be accomplished without venturing to such an extreme as to robotize the Article III judges themselves.

Second primary benefit of AI law is AI Judiciary would be more consistent and less biased. The better way to deal with this issue is that human would be becoming more aware of it and compensating for it and another way is to reduce judicial discretion in situations where the impacts of bias will in general be especially intense. We know that biasness in the Judiciary is a issue but replacing human with a software is not proper solution.

The third primary benefit of AI law is access to justice in lower prices. If AI is able to provide access to justice in lower price without venturing to such an extreme as to supplant Article III judges then we have no issues. But arbitration system so long is it is deliberately consented to, may be another approach to potential catch some admittance to equity benefit while keeping a human Article III Judiciary.


Further more in the paper I attempt to discuss the rules and regulations regarding AI. The latest advances in man-made consciousness (AI) have raised a few moral difficulties. Maybe perhaps the most significant is whether mankind will actually want to control independent machines.

It is getting more typical to see robots responsible for housework or self-driving vehicles (for

e.g. Amazon’s) which are controlled by AI. While this sort of innovation makes life simpler, it could likewise confuse it. The issue is that no calculation can decide if an AI would hurt the world. The scientist likewise bring up that mankind may not know when hyper savvy machines have shown up, in light of the fact that choosing whether a gadget has knowledge better than people is in a similar domain as the regulation issue. Our policy maker or executive is also unable to make rule, regulations, laws or act related to the regulation of AI.

With the current situation of rapid development in the field of technology we can assume that in future also there is a extreme growth of technology and it is beneficial also for us. So we have to adopt it but here need some restrictions also to regulate the AI. That’s why our policy makers need to work on the rules, regulations and laws related to the AI.


I further try to discuss about the legal profession and legal degrees in future. Definition of the practice of law as ‘what lawyers do’ are specified by the regulators of America and Australia.3 For e.g. Australian Legal Profession Uniform Law (section 10) said that “prohibits unqualified

  1. Campbell (n 101) 37

entities from engaging in legal practice and as efforts to practice law or provide legal service.”4 What then amounts to legal services? It is defined as “work done, or business transacted, in the ordinary course of legal practice.”5

Today we can see that all the profession are diminishing bit by bit by AI and if we talk about the law field then consider an example if we have a data-set contained of all the records of sentencing decision of every criminal defendants in a given jurisdiction. Then this data-set contain all the needed information relating to sentencing. This advances are very useful in development. The slow development of AI into areas of lawful practice is in all likelihood due to various primary disconnects between the requirements of profound learning frameworks what’s more, the truth of law.

We cannot say that there is no effect of deep learning on the legal profession. Now medium and large law firms starts to adopt deep learning automation bit by bit and that’s why now the law firms choose the lawyers on the basis of technical knowledge. “Lawyers with the data centric technical skills will lead the charge here, and will be in great demand.”

Justice A.K. Sikri Supreme Court Judge said that “Legit-quest may become a tool to felicitate and a tool for augmentation and not automation in the sense that it replaces the lawyers community itself.”6

Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Judge of High Court of Delhi said that “I think the technology legit- quest has adopted is a next level one, where it is not simply throwing up searches from database which exist.7

Law student are more effected. We can say that gone are the days when first year graduates could get the salary as a case attorney at a renowned firm, grinding out 14 hours of record survey each day. This work is now already done by the AI system in future for the law graduates in the developed countries. The ascent of AI, joined with the freshly discovered hesitance of in-house advice to pay for the preparation of junior attorneys, will influence the quality of junior partners recruited. Indeed the not so distant future, graduate numbers entering business law practice will be level or then again declining and firms will be hoping to retrain innovation competent set up legal counselors into the arising areas of innovation helped practice.

  1. Legal Profession Uniform Law Application Act 2014 (Vic) sch 1 s 10
  2. Ibid sch 1 s 6
  3. https://cio.economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/business-analytics/artificial-intelligence-may-help-you- win-your-next-court-case/61864766
  4. Ibid

We already see that AI is involved in administrative law determination of various kinds8. Similarly we will see AI for automated, online dispute resolution. We can assume that the demand for judges and litigators will diminish because online dispute resolution start to handle a range of disputes9.


We can conclude that there are advantages of AI Judges and courts but advantages are restricted and likely could be exceed by the disadvantages which include a sketchy capacity to progressively adjust after sometime to evolving condition and conceivable adverse impacts concerning of separation of powers. That’s why before making any plan to adopt AI Judiciary we have to look seriously on these potential drawbacks of AI judiciary.

All changes affect the law schools. There will generally a reduced demand for law degrees because there is a decline in the market for the law services and the law students see struggle to find a job after the completion of graduation. We can see an emerging development in technology which emerged more rapidly in the upcoming years that’s why now we seriously need to look after the rules and regulations of AI.

References :-

  1. https://heinonline.org/HOL/PrintRequest?public=true&handle=hein.journals/swales43& div=52&start_page=1199&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults &print=section&format=PDFsearchable&submit=Print%2FDownload
  2. https://heinonline.org/HOL/PrintRequest?public=true&handle=hein.journals/flr88&div= 21&start_page=531&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults&print


  1. https://heinonline.org/HOL/PrintRequest?public=true&handle=hein.journals/clr119&div

=62&start_page=2001&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults&pr int=section&format=PDFsearchable&submit=Print%2FDownload

  1. https://heinonline.org/HOL/PrintRequest?public=true&handle=hein.journals/ucinlr88&d iv=41&start_page=1083&collection=journals&set_as_cursor=0&men_tab=srchresults& print=section&format=PDFsearchable&submit=Print%2FDownload
  2. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID3621194_code3388300.pdf?abstrac
  3. Zalnieriute, Benette Moses and Williams (n 12)
  4. Richard Susskind, Online Courts and the Future of Justice (Oxford University Press, 2019); Colin Rule, ‘Making Peace on E bay: Resolving Disputes in the World’s Largest Marketplace’ (Fall 2008) AC Resolution 8 <http://colinrule.com/writing/acr2008.pdf>; Benjamin H Barton and Stephanos Bibas, Rebooting Justice: More Technology, Fewer Lawyers, and the Future of Law (Encounter Books, 2017) 111-15.


1 Chelsi Agarwal, Student at Banasthali Vidyapith