AI-assisted review, better client advice
Legal innovation is most valuable when it delivers tangible benefits for clients, whether that means clearer advice, greater efficiency, or better-informed decision-making.
A recent matter illustrates this well.
The review challenge
We were asked to review two substantial documents relating to a complex services arrangement: the client’s specification and the supplier’s proposal.
Reviewing either document alone would be straightforward. But reviewing both to identify gaps and conflicts would be time-consuming and challenging because the documents were structured differently. In practice, it meant comparing apples with oranges.
This is a familiar commercial challenge. Important discrepancies may appear across different sections, use different terms, or be buried in operational detail, making it harder to identify the points that could have the greatest commercial impact.
An AI-assisted first pass
We used Harvey for an AI-assisted comparison as part of the review.
This provided a first pass, drawing together potential inconsistencies and organising them by subject. It gave us a clear starting point for a closer review of the documents and helped focus our analysis on the areas that mattered most to the client.
The key point is that the output was not treated as the final advice.
Our team still needed to check the underlying documents, consider the context, distinguish meaningful risks from superficial differences, and decide what mattered most to the client. We then condensed the analysis into a short table linking each inconsistency to its potential legal or commercial consequence.
The resulting issues included differences in payment timing, the evidence required for sign-off, the scope of the services, delivery milestones, and the basis on which the overall price had been calculated.
From discrepancies to decisions
The benefit was not simply a shorter review process. For the client, it meant receiving clear, structured advice focused on the discrepancies that could have practical consequences for the arrangement.
Instead of receiving a long piece of unfiltered AI-generated analysis, the client could see the key areas of misalignment and their practical consequences, informed by our human understanding of their business and the market. That supported a more focused discussion about which points required clarification, which needed contractual protection and which could be accepted as commercial risk.
This approach also allows lawyers to spend more time on the areas where clients benefit most from their expertise: assessing risk, making judgment calls, and helping the client choose the best course of action.
The approach is not flawless. AI-generated analysis can miss context, overstate issues, or present a confident answer that does not withstand scrutiny, so careful review remains essential. Used responsibly, however, it can make the lawyer’s analysis more structured and the client’s choices easier to understand.
Better advice, faster
Clients receive better advice, faster, helping them make informed decisions and achieve better outcomes for their businesses. This human-plus-tech approach offers the best of both worlds.
Human judgement remains essential
The real value of legal innovation is not in replacing lawyers. It is in giving them better tools to deliver stronger advice and better client outcomes.
For businesses considering how innovation could improve their legal delivery, the starting point should be the outcome they want to achieve, with technology selected and applied in support of that goal.
