The Rise of Generative AI in Legal Practice
Understanding Generative AI
Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) is a fascinating subfield of AI that employs machine learning and deep learning techniques to create new content across various media—text, images, audio, and video. Its applications are gaining traction across diverse sectors, including healthcare, finance, entertainment, legal practice, and education. By streamlining processes, GenAI enhances efficiency and productivity.
GenAI and the Legal Profession
In the legal industry, GenAI proves especially useful. It assists attorneys in drafting, reviewing, summarizing, and translating documents and facilitates legal research at preliminary stages. This technology alleviates the heavy load of labor-intensive tasks that often consume valuable time and resources within law firms.
The Mechanics Behind GenAI
Tools like ChatGPT rely on Large Language Models (LLMs) built on transformer architecture, trained on extensive datasets of textual information. These models generate text by predicting which word is likely to come next in a sequence, making them adept at producing coherent and contextually relevant output. However, it’s essential to note that these models do not truly understand language or context; they simply recognize patterns.
The Issue of Hallucination
Despite their impressive capabilities, GenAI tools are susceptible to a phenomenon known as “hallucination.” This occurs when LLMs output inaccurate or entirely fictitious information that appears plausible. In legal practice, this poses serious risks. If attorneys inadvertently cite non-existent cases generated by these tools, it could lead to incorrect legal advice, undermine the judicial system’s integrity, and erode public trust in the legal profession.
Consequences of Misuse in Legal Practice
The repercussions of relying on inaccurate information from GenAI tools can be severe. A notable case from Singapore—Tajudin bin Gulam Rasul and Another v Suriaya bte Haja Mohideen—underscored this danger. Here, the court criticized counsel for citing a fictitious case generated by a GenAI tool and ordered them to pay $800 in costs personally. This ruling emphasizes the significant responsibility lawyers bear as officers of the court, tasked with ensuring the accuracy of the materials they present.
Similar incidents have surfaced globally. For example, in Mata v Avianca, Inc (2023), two attorneys in the United States faced sanctions for referencing non-existent judicial decisions produced by ChatGPT in their legal documents. Another case, People v Crabill (2023), resulted in an attorney being suspended after he filed a motion citing fabricated cases without having read or verified them.
Ensuring Responsible Use of GenAI
To mitigate the risks associated with GenAI misuse, it is crucial for legal professionals to adopt a responsible approach. The Bar Council Malaysia’s Circular No. 342/2023 highlights the importance of verifying outputs from GenAI tools against traditional legal databases. This vigilance is necessary to uphold the standards of the profession and maintain the integrity of legal processes.
Continuing Challenges: Legal Hallucination Rates
Research reveals that hallucination remains a persistent issue in AI applications within law. A study by Dahl et al. published in 2024 found that the hallucination rate for generative models when answering legal queries was alarmingly high, ranging from 69% to 88%. Furthermore, another pair of researchers reported in their 2025 paper that the hallucination probability for leading AI legal research tools could be between 17% and 33%.
The Future of GenAI in Legal Practice
While GenAI can greatly expedite legal processes and enhance productivity, it is essential for legal practitioners to recognize it as merely a preliminary tool. Its output should always be rigorously vetted for accuracy before it’s presented in court or cited in academic publications. The path forward lies in honing the balance between leveraging advanced technology and adhering to the highest professional standards. This will ensure that the integrity of legal practice is preserved while embracing modern advancements.
— Dr. Kuek Chee Ying is a senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law, Universiti Malaya
