Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Christophe Frèrebeau, CEO and co-founder of Della, discusses the evolution of AI in law.
AI-driven contract lifecycle management and analysis technology has been receiving lots of attention in the law firm and enterprise space recently. With Ironclad recently valued at $1 billion, Evisort raising $35 Million in Series B funding and Agiloft raising £45 Million. Not to mention Docusign’s acquisition of Seal Software for $188 million last year. So, it’s unsurprising that the spotlight is fixed firmly on this space. With adoption, market consolidation and sales also increasing, it is clear that contract analysis is now seen as an investment with huge potential for both buyers and investors.
What is also clear is that the spike in interest, adoption, and investment comes from a universal need across the business world to boost productivity. Increased client pressures, the volume of work and, of course, Covid-19 have all accelerated digital adoption and the need to drive efficiencies in the way organisations are run. However, despite recent interest, contract analysis tools are not exactly new kids on the block, and as a nascent technology, there is still plenty of room for AI-driven contract lifecycle management and analysis technology to evolve to meet the ongoing needs of end-users, whether they are in law firms or corporate legal departments.
Contracts define who does what, at a defined price or prices, over a specified time. Contracts also determine who is responsible when things go wrong, whether in a transaction or in an overall relationship. Businesses have run on contracts for centuries. As a result, early attempts at using AI in law have focused on managing, or should I say ‘detecting’ clauses in contracts. I like to imagine this as AI being used like a yellow highlighter going through your contracts and flagging the bits that require your attention. There is no question that this was, and still is a very significant step in the digitisation of the legal sector, enabling technology to take some of the burden from lawyers.
The crucial point is that this type of contract analysis technology isn’t true AI. A lawyer still has to manually review a clause and spend time finding the answer to their specific question. If we want to use AI to its full potential in this process, we need a tool that does more than just ‘highlights’ the clause that you need to review, but actually finds the answers to your questions, thereby providing you with actionable information quickly.
From a law firm standpoint, the new direction is clear: the client must come first. If not they will go elsewhere. From a technology standpoint, perhaps less so. Many solutions in the contract review market struggle to balance putting the client first and providing a solution that can service large numbers of customers with different needs. In an attempt to put their clients first, many in the contract analysis technology market train individual AI models for specific tasks. This training requires large amounts of niche legal data and human supervision to get the model up to speed. It is expensive and difficult to maintain. As a result, many legal tech vendors are oversimplifying a contract’s role, by defining it as a single document containing a set of clauses. In short, they are standardising legal processes to fit their “one size fits all” solution.
Some vendors have started to notice these limitations and are building capabilities within their solutions to overcome them. For example, adding custom fields and tracking user-generated data points. However, despite them adapting to meet the needs of their clients, these “bolt on” capabilities often lead to increased complexity. So, rather than trying to get your contracts to fit the narrow criteria of your legal technology, wouldn’t it be better if your contract analysis technology was flexible enough to provide the information your users actually need from any given contract? Rather than basing it on assumptions of what they might need on an oversimplified version of a contract.
The next step in contract analysis must be to help lawyers on both sides of the table to drive efficiencies in their contract management lifecycle. Moving from a traditional process, which requires a great deal of manual oversight, to true AI, which removes the burden of oversight and manual review from lawyers, while allowing them to remain in control. Contract analysis should not oversimplify legal processes. It should allow users to customise their tools to their specific needs and, crucially, it should be easy to use.
Ultimately, the goal of AI is to assist us, by making cumbersome tasks as painless as possible.
Della’s platform launched in January (2020), but it is already being used by small and large law firms across multiple countries and several large multinational corporations. Those law firm partners range in size, from top UK and European law firms, to smaller boutique providers and enterprise organisations. Della’s customers include: Eversheds Sutherland, Fidal, BCLP, Wolters Kluwer, and Content Square (USA). The smallest law firm currently using Della has 12 lawyers. Last year, Della launched a partnership with Wolters Kluwer to provide Della to their contract management platform customers.
On Monday, US district judge Loretta Preska found Steven Donziger to be guilty of six contempt charges brought against him for refusing to transfer evidence in a complex legal dispute that set Donziger directly against oil company Chevron.
Preska said that the lawyer had “repeatedly and willfully” defied court orders and said it was time for Donziger to pay the price of his wrongdoing. Donziger will now face six months in jail. However, the lawyer has said that he will appeal against the ruling.
Donziger has already been confined to his New York City apartment for almost two years under a court order, with a monitoring bracelet fitted to his ankle at all times. Donziger’s detention has gained him the support of several celebrities and environmental activists, including Pink Floyd singer Roger Water and actor Alec Baldwin.
The decade-long legal saga stems from a 2011 judgement in Ecuador where oil company Chevron was ordered to pay out $9.5 billion in damages to people who suffered decades of polluted air and water. Donziger, who represented the people affected by the pollution, accused Chevron of polluting the area through its oil drilling operations. However, Chevron has never accepted Donziger’s accusations and has accused the lawyer of bribing the judge in Ecuador and composing the final verdict. Donziger has strongly denied these claims.
However, back in 2016, US judge Lewis Kaplan, ruled that Donziger was involved in racketeering activity. The judge granted the oil company’s seizure of Donziger’s mobile phone and laptop, and when the lawyer appealed, he was put under house arrest with charges of contempt.
Kristen Motzer, Learning Director at LRN, explains how law firms can benefit from diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) programmes.
Standard corporate training is not enough to create an inclusive workplace culture. Law firms need to go beyond settling for subpar training and, instead, seek creative ways to both educate and inspire their employees. As diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) increases in organisational priority, having a welcoming environment is essential, as workers need to feel a sense of belonging.
An effective DEI training programme can help to achieve this, as it sets out a plan for how to apply learning and communication initiatives and how to help your organisation understand systemic DEI issues, share experiences, build empathy, and reflect on how they can drive change. When all these factors are included within a firm’s DEI curriculum alongside best learning design practices, this can ensure that the material is both effective and meaningful.
The key to achieving a successful DEI training programme is creating a curriculum with an engaging, connected, and inspiring learning strategy. Consider these six factors as you begin designing your curriculum.
Firms must consistently engage participants throughout the year. Quick one-off training sessions are no longer deemed recommendable. Instead, the new way of approaching learning development is by applying microlearning. This is the process of delivering mini and easily digestible learning bites to employees when and where they need it. This will increase the retention rate, and employees are more likely to apply the training material. DEI topics that focus on improving individual and company-wide behaviour will especially thrive using this tactic, as long as the learning material is reinforced over a period of time.
To see real behavioural change, a range of learning experiences also needs to be applied. For example, videos, infographics, and quizzes should be incorporated in order to keep people engaged.
DEI should be perceived as a journey of shared experiences instead of a written on-paper guide. It encompasses a wide range of sensitive topics, many of which will lead to conversation and self-reflection. Therefore, your DEI training programme should assess where it is essential to involve group discussions and aim to encourage asking questions, as learning individually is not enough to change behaviour.
Leaders should be active participants in the learning process in order to show that DEI is a part of the firm’s daily operation. Executives and managers need to be representatives for DEI, whether it be through facilitating or leading team exercises, employees need to see that they are directly involved. Change begins at the top; if the leader sets a good example, the rest of the pack will surely follow.
Your DEI plan needs to reflect the international scale of the firm. A way to do this is to remember that cultural differences must be incorporated into learning, even when it may seem universal. Using a global lens means going further than including more people of different nationalities in your imagery.
Even though this is a step forward, this does not necessarily mean the content will be more relatable. Cultural differences must be embraced. The unfortunate fact is that discrimination and racism are everywhere, and how it manifests can vary depending on where you are. This must be considered when developing DEI material, starting with the most fundamental message of seeing our commonalities with one another, then moving forward from there.
Hearing the experiences of real people and using real-world examples for case studies within your DEI curriculum is more likely to resonate with learners. By listening to unscripted stories based on DEI issues, employees are able to empathise by relating to the human experience.
Additionally, the practice of listening to one another encourages the action of being open to forming friendships outside of familiar territory. Therefore, offering guidance on how to apply the information learned during the training. This will ensure the learning experience extends beyond the firm’s office and into the real world.
In the past, ethics and compliance training often placed actions in two boxes: “do,” and “do not do.” However, DEI is much more nuanced than that. Your curriculum should be focused on understanding systemic issues and what needs to change and encouraging people to reflect on their own perceptions. By equipping people with the skills to navigate grey areas, they are more likely to cultivate a respectful workplace environment. The world is not black and white, this must be exhibited in your DEI curriculum as well.
At the end of the day, the most important takeaway is that employees should learn how to respect the experiences of other people. This can be achieved by ensuring there is a human-centred learning program in place. The goal of a successful DEI programme is to ensure workers feel like they can bring their whole selves to the workplace, without fear of judgement or being in culturally insensitive situations.
Kristen Motzer is a leader in values-based behaviour change and an experienced designer of engaging scalable learning solutions. As a Learning Director at LRN, she oversees the learning design of the company’s library of online and facilitated learning experiences on a variety of ethics and compliance, DEI, leadership, and other topics.
As the pandemic continues to shake up traditional ways of working across the legal sector, US law firm Gibson Dunn has encouraged its lawyers and trainees to work remotely whenever doing so is appropriate. Managing partner Barbara Becker said that both clients’ and the teams’ needs should be taken into consideration, as well as the lawyer’s own comfort. Becker said that balancing professional responsibilities with personal responsibilities was key to a vibrant and sustainable career.
However, the firm has also stated that lawyers, in particular juniors and trainees, will still need to come into the firm’s office’s from time to time. Becker stressed that the firm would not want any of its employees to miss out on the training, mentorship, and professional development benefits that come with in-person collaboration.
Gibson Dunn is amongst many other law firms that are adopting new ways of working in response to the lifting of lockdown measures. Several firms are already finding that flexible working initiatives are improving the productivity and mental well-being of lawyers and trainees alike.
From dog bites to drunk drivers, a personal injury claim can arise in a whole host of situations. The legal definition of a personal injury is when a person's body, mind, or emotions are injured as a result of the negligence, carelessness, or wrongful conduct of another person.
Personal injury law, also known as tort law, gives an injured person the right to be financially compensated after they have suffered a loss as a result of someone else's negligence. In a successful personal injury case, the person who caused the injury or harm is responsible for compensating the person who has suffered the loss. If you have had an accident caused by the fault of another, you may be entitled to receive compensation, also called damages, from the individual or business that is legally responsible.
A valid personal injury claim must prove that the other party - the defendant - was negligent and, therefore, at fault for the accident that caused your injury. Establishing negligence in a personal injury claim can be difficult and requires enough evidence to show that the other party was at fault. An experienced law firm that specialises in the field of personal injury law can help you with putting together a viable claim. To prove the other party is liable for compensating you for your injury it is necessary to show that the four elements of negligence were present in your claim.
1. Duty of care
This refers to the other party’s responsibility to ensure your safety. Did the defendant have a legal duty to prevent or avoid causing you harm?
2. Breach of duty
This occurs when the defendant fails to exercise reasonable care or act in a manner that an average person would do under similar circumstances. It must be proven that a reasonably able person placed in the defendant’s position at the time of the accident would have acted differently.
3. Causation
Causation requires you to show that the defendant’s breach of duty directly caused your injury. You must be able to prove that the defendant’s negligence is the sole cause for the injury you suffered and that this would not have happened if the defendant had acted differently. It’s important to note that the defendant must have foreseen that his or her actions would result in an injury. If, for example, the action that caused your injury was an unexpected act of nature then it would be deemed unforeseeable, resulting in an unsuccessful claim.
4. Damages
The final element needed to prove negligence is to show that the defendant’s actions caused you to suffer actual damages for which you can be compensated. Damages can include any medical expenses you incurred, emotional distress suffered, or loss of income caused as a result of your injury.
If you can successfully establish these four elements of negligence were present in your claim, then you have a strong chance of securing compensation for your injuries.
Eleanor Weaver, CEO at Luminance, explains why allowing lawyers greater autonomy over their work environment boosts the legal sector's potential for improved inclusivity.
For some, the pandemic only exacerbated this issue as remote working blurred the lines between people’s personal and professional lives. But for others, the past year has completely shifted their day-to-day routines. Technology has allowed them to conduct their work with more rigour and speed than ever before and crucially, from any location. And by allowing lawyers to have more autonomy over their working environment, the legal sector has the potential to become more inclusive.
Historically, the lack of flexible working opportunities has disproportionately affected women over men. McKinsey found that female attorneys feel forced to make significant trade-offs between career success and their personal lives, with only 44% of women surveyed believing that they could achieve a good balance between both. Indeed, despite the fact that in 2019, 52% of new entrants to the solicitors’ profession in the UK were women, this figure fell to only 19% at equity partner level. Enforced office working can also make a career in law inaccessible for individuals who are disabled or chronically ill. Just 3% of solicitors in the UK have a disability, even though approximately 19% of the working-age population is disabled.
But the pandemic has highlighted just how agile and forward-looking the legal industry can be when it comes to working patterns and practices. Many firms have turned to technology that allows them to access their documents, respond to urgent legal issues and collaborate with teams, whether they are at their desk in the office or at their kitchen table. And now, growing numbers of world-leading firms such as Linklaters, Norton Rose Fullbright and Freshfields have stated their support of longer-term remote and flexible working practices.
And they are right to – it’s been proven that work can be completed to the same standard when working remotely as if the whole team were physically together in an office. In fact, I was recently talking to a firm that had to complete a Data Subject Access Request on behalf of a client whilst working remotely because of Covid-19. The Innovation Manager told me afterwards that by using AI, they were “able to maintain workload capacity and meet tight deadlines.” He went on to say that “during that critical period, technology had never been so important.”
For firms looking to attract and retain top talent moving forward, embracing flexible working patterns will be a critical enabler. A study by Timewise found that 91% of women either work flexibly or want to, and a survey of over 100 disabled lawyers conducted by the Law Society of England and Wales found that 70% of those surveyed would prefer to continue working remotely in the long-term. For many women, having the option to work from home enables them to balance their work and family lives, moulding their schedules to make it easier to manage their day-to-day needs. With increasing numbers of women or disabled lawyers remaining in practice, firms will have more opportunities to promote them into senior roles, in turn improving the diversity and culture of their businesses in the long term.
And it is not just women and disabled lawyers who will benefit from the greater use of tech - junior lawyers are increasingly factoring in technology when applying for jobs. Where firms use AI to automate the review process, rather than having associates trawl through thousands of documents, junior lawyers are exposed to more projects faster, building up their experience. I was recently speaking to Tanja Podinic, Assistant General Counsel at Dentons, who told me that: “we [Dentons] need to make sure we are adopting technology like Luminance because the upcoming generation are expecting it.” Clearly, technology is now a significant pull factor for young people.
The business case for greater flexibility in a post-Covid world is self-evident, and technology is a key enabler in making more flexible working patterns not only viable, but effective. By adopting these patterns, firms will be able to retain top talent who were previously disadvantaged by the system, driving profit overall.
The state Supreme Court determined that the tech giant was subjected to Pennsylvania pay statutes, despite the federal statute not requiring such pay. Under state laws, justices observed that “hours worked” are defined as any time that a worker spends on their employer’s premises. Under the law, time spent in security checks falls under the “hours worked” bracket.
Back in 2014, the US Supreme Court ruled that Amazon employees were not entitled to pay for the time spent in security lines. Due to this ruling, a Pennsylvania district court dismissed the first bout of lawsuits against the tech giant. However, the 6th US Circuit Court of Appeals found that the circumstances to be more ambivalent, and handed the case to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court to determine whether or not the state’s minimum wage laws should be applied to instances when workers were asked to perform tasks indirectly related to their core responsibilities.
Pennsylvania Supreme Court justices dismissed Amazon’s argument that time spent in security checks does not amount to labour. In a win for labour advocates, it was determined that Amazon warehouse workers were entitled to recompense for their time.
As a car accident lawyer, you don’t want to repeat what every other fellow out there is doing. That’s boring to the clients since they already know what your competitors are up to. Instead, you need to sell yourself in an outstanding way that greatly resonates with your target audience. This is especially true in the legal industry since it’s getting more crowded with every passing of the day.
Here are a few handy tips to help build your legal brand:
You can look at brand identity as the visible elements that distinguish your business from the rest. Examples of these elements are:
All of these should be unique so the public identifies them with your law firm. For instance, when a stranger sees your logo, they shouldn’t mistake it for another firm they know. The same is true for all the other elements listed above.
Also, ensure that they’re done professionally. When potential clients land at your website, don’t allow them to move to the next one because of poor user experience. Give them a reason to hang around and interact with you or your content. Eventually, there’s a possibility they might do business with you.
Don’t imagine that portraying yourself as a jack of all trades is a smart move. Usually, people want to know exactly what they can get from you. So, list down the range of services you offer. What problems do you solve? Make it clear to the public.
Being a car accident lawyer, you’d want to include aspects like the following:
By doing so, you won’t trouble potential clients by making inquiries for services you don’t offer. It also increases your conversion rates since whoever calls you already knows what kind of cases you deal with.
Whether you’re operating your law firm as an individual or as a team with other lawyers, personal branding is very important. In other words, each lawyer in the team must showcase their skills and strengths. They should do it in an effective manner that wins the hearts of people with court cases.
Understand that, for every case, a particular lawyer within the team deals with the client from the start to the end. Thus, clients want to know that the lawyer handling their case is highly skilled. So, in addition to the firm branding, let each member of the firm brand themselves.
In this time and age, a bigger percentage of people turn to search engines to look for information about virtually anything. Before a potential client hires you, they’ll most probably look you up on the internet to try to find out what kind of lawyer you are. If they don’t find you online, they can easily brush you off as non-competent.
For this reason, make a point of starting a blog. Curate content that helps solve people’s problems. Also, share the same content on several social media platforms. This is a good way to interact with your target audience. The more you engage with them, the stronger the connection you create. Thus, doing business with you won’t be difficult, which is what the public loves.
A brand voice is vital for establishing a tight bond with your target audience. Every print, audio, or video material you place out there has a message you’re trying to pass across. So, what’s the overall tone of such messages? Do the clients find it lovely?
If that’s the case, good. But if not, try to improve your way of communicating with the masses. Consider going for a brand voice that’s professional, friendly, service-oriented, conversational, and informative. The better your brand voice, the better the connection you create with potential customers.
Additionally, be consistent with your voice so that your fans can immediately recognise a message from you, even if you don’t outrightly state it.
Given the hundreds of firms that are out there competing for the same customers, there’s a need to stand out as a car accident lawyer. To get your fair share of the market, you need to make a conscious effort to build your legal brand. Use the tips above as a starting point, and then explore even more ways.
Ateeq Rafiq, aged 24, died in hospital after his neck became trapped under the powered chair as he searched for his mobile phones and keys after seeing a film at one of Vue’s UK cinemas. It was later found that the chair had a blown fuse in its control box.
At Birmingham crown court on Tuesday, Judge Heidi Kubik QC ordered Vue to pay £130,000 in costs in addition to the £750,000 fine. However, the judge said that no words or ruling could ameliorate the loss suffered by Rafiq’s wife and family, and went on to state that the complete lack of risk assessment was a major cause behind the fatal incident.
At a hearing back in April, Vue pleaded guilty to failing to ensure the health and safety of its customers in connection with the use of powered cinema seating. The company also pleaded guilty to failing to make sufficient risk assessments of a number of faulty seats in its cinemas.
Following the sentencing, Vue said that it was saddened by Mr Rafiq’s death and that the company remains deeply sorry for the loss suffered by his friends and family.
Stephen Halloran, Director at Lawtons Solicitors, criminal defence solicitors in London share their expertise on the difference between wrongful and fraudulent trading.
Wrongful and fraudulent trading are two different types of trading offences that company directors should be extremely mindful of. The main difference between the two is the intent and deception behind the actions. Fraudulent trading is the more severe issue, due to being viewed as a criminal offence. Whereas wrongful trading, although still serious, is a civil offence with a less severe intent behind it.
Both offences can lead to potential disqualification from company directorship for up to 15 years. In general, any form of trading offence will be detrimental to a company and the reputation of the directors. This guide will give you the information you need to help identify the differences between the two offences and how to avoid them.
If a company enters into liquidation after becoming insolvent, a liquidator will look into the conduct of the directors during the period leading up to insolvency. The investigation will determine whether any wrongful or fraudulent trading has occurred. If a director is found to have traded in either manner, thus leading to the company’s insolvency, this will be stated within the report and passed on to the Insolvency Service.
Wrongful and fraudulent trading can be differentiated by the level of severity and the intent behind them. Fraudulent trading is a serious, criminal offence, which can lead to a long disqualification, a steep fine or, in some cases, even imprisonment. On the other hand, wrongful trading is a much more common offence and is often carried out unintentionally. However, both offences can cause significant consequences.
Wrongful trading is a civil offence covered by the Insolvency Act 1986. It is the term given to a company that continues to trade, despite the knowledge that the company is insolvent. During the time period prior to insolvency, company directors must focus on creditors’ interests before focusing on their own.
Directors that choose to put their own interests first can be found guilty of wrongful trading. It may be the case that the directors were attempting to help improve the fate of their company or did not fully understand the upcoming fate of the business due to poor communication. Some examples of fraudulent trading are:
Fraudulent trading is a criminal offence under the Insolvency Act 1986. It describes a scenario where a company carries on operating during the course of liquidation, with the direct intention of defrauding creditors and customers of the company. It means that directors have deliberately continued to trade to increase the amount of income prior to liquidation. In order for a company to be found guilty of fraudulent trading, the Insolvency Service must be able to show that actions were carried out in a deliberate and deceptive manner.
The consequences of being found guilty of wrongful trading can include the following :
The consequences of being found guilty of fraudulent trading are much more serious. Consequences can include:
As the consequences of wrongful or fraudulent trading can potentially be serious, it is important to prepare a defence as soon as you can. Acquiring the assistance and support of an experienced lawyer can be invaluable and lead to the best possible outcome. A professional lawyer may be able to help demonstrate that you acted in a responsible and reasonable manner, along with establishing the best plan of action.
Lawtons Solicitors is a long-established criminal defence specialist firm, recognised as being national leaders in crime by Chambers & Partners and ranked by Legal 500. One of the largest specialist criminal solicitors in London & the Home Counties.
