Day 3: 30 September

Sign up here… 

Regulating AI in the Legal Marketplace: Where to Draw the Line?- (CDT 06:00-07:00 / BST 12:00-13:00 / KST 21:00-22:00)

Session description:

Providers of legal services and legal technology tools, like many other businesses, are introducing AI into their organizations to drive quality, efficiency, and innovation. To what extent should regulators be involved in lawyers’ use of AI in the provision of legal services and the development of AI-based tools that purport to provide legal services?

Topics to be discussed include:

  • Whether legal regulators have a role in regulating the development and use of legal AI tools
  • Cooperation between regulators in the regulation of AI
  • Updates from the EU, including the issue of how far AI should be permitted to go down the legal decision-making process,
  • Ethical frameworks to guide the application of AI in judicial systems and provision of legal services
  • Should different AI tools be regulated differently. For example, do predictive analytics tools require different or more stringent regulation than “chatbots”?
  • Should AI augment or drive the provision of legal services and making of decisions and how does the use of AI in legal services affect the roles and responsibilities of lawyers?

Amy Salyzyn, Associate Professor, University of Ottawa
Dan Hunter, Dean of Law/Chief Investigator, Queensland University of Technology/Australian Research Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society
Tracy Vegro, Solicitors Regulation Authority
Gabriela Bar, Executive Partner, Szostek_Bar and Partners Law Firm / Silesia University

 – – –

The Role of Regulators in Promoting Fairer Legal Services: Responding to Issues of Vulnerability and Legal Capability- (CDT 08:00-09:15 / BST 14:00-15:15 / KST 23:00-00:15)

Session description:

People often need legal support at a point when their circumstances – a relationship breakdown, bereavement, unemployment – make them more vulnerable. Sometimes people’s personal characteristics, such as poor mental health or learning differences, mean that they already have a degree of vulnerability before they face these same life changing events. Research shows that a person’s legal capability – in essence, the knowledge, skills and confidence to deal effectively with legal issues – is a key influence on their experience of accessing legal services and the outcomes they achieve.

The way that markets operate, services are designed, and providers behave, can all lead to outcomes that are worse for some people than for others. This unfairness in markets is often avoidable and may result from a lack of understanding on the part of service providers. Reducing vulnerability and improving legal capability are important strategies for ensuring that everybody can access and use legal services when they need them.

  • What is legal capability and how does it affect people’s experience of legal services?
  • How can regulation help to ensure fairer treatment of people with low legal capability or other vulnerable circumstances?
  • Should lawyers have a duty to take additional care to ensure vulnerable people receive outcomes that are as good as for other consumers?
  • How can inclusive design principles – designing services so that they can be accessed by everyone – inform approaches to this issue?

Steve Brooker, Head, Policy Development and Research, Legal Services Board
Nigel John Balmer, Professor, Research Director, Victoria Law Foundation
Micharel Katagaya, Team Leader, Evidence and Methods Lab
Martin Coppack, Director, Fair By Design
Margaret Hagan, Stanford Legal Design Lab

– – –

How Do We Investigate and Enforce?- (CDT 09:30-10:30 / BST 15:30-16:30 / KST 00:30-01:30 [1st])

Session description: 

This workshop will introduce conference attendees to different regulatory models and best practices for managing, investigating, and prosecuting complaints. With practical input from jurisdictions with recognized ‘best practice’ models, attendees will come away with some of the tools and resources needed to create or re-engineer the best model for their needs and structure. Attendees will gain an understanding of what it means to be a risk-focused, proactive and proportional regulator.

Juliet Oliver, General Counsel, Solicitors Regulation Authority

– – –

Networking Session: Revealing Chicago: A Virtual Glimpse at Chicago History & Architecture – (CDT 19:30-21:00 / BST 01:30-03:00[1st] / KST 09:30-11:00 [1st])

Session description:

This networking session provides a unique look at our host city for the 2021 ICLR. Learn how Chicago developed from primordial swampland to the world’s leading center for modern architecture. Topics for this visually-rich program include the Great Chicago Fire and its aftermath, the development of Chicago’s unique criminal underworld, Daniel Burnham, Louis Sullivan, Mies van der Rohe, pigs and cows, art, gospel music, jazz and the blues. In addition, several significant lawyer ethics issues in the City’s history will be featured.

James Grogan, Adjunct Professor, Loyola University of Chicago School of Law

– – –

The Role of the Regulator in Market Transparency and Comparison Services – (CDT 21:00-22:00 / BST 03:00-04:00 [1st] / KST 12:00-13:00 [1st])

Session description: 

What is the role of the regulator in marketplace transparency, particularly the accessibility of information on pricing and quality of services, including comparison services? Like them or loathe them, price comparison and customer review websites are a feature of modern life – and increasingly a feature of legal services markets. In theory, these websites make it easier for consumers to shop around for services that meet their needs and make firms compete harder to market and deliver their services. But there are also concerns about these tools, such as fake and malicious reviews, and whether consumers are really able to judge the quality of service they receive. And while many law firms successfully use them to manage their online reputations, a few have sued clients who left negative reviews for defamation.

How do regulators deal with these market tools? Internationally, jurisdictions have responded in different ways on a spectrum from embracing them to trying to ban them. In some jurisdictions, national competition authorities and regulators are taking a greater interest in making sure that legal services markets are working well for consumers. This includes a focus on law firms making their prices more transparent, improving information about the quality of services, and making it easier for consumers to compare different services. Yet in other jurisdictions, regulators have no role in how the market operates.

Our session will address these questions and others that arise in our session:

  • What role, if any, should regulators have in making markets work better for consumers?
  • How can we improve the transparency of the price and quality of legal services for consumers?
  • Should price comparison and customer review websites are viewed as a positive development, a necessary evil, or unsuitable for legal services?
  • What, if anything, should regulators do to build trust among the public and professionals in price comparison and customer review websites?

Fiona McLeay, Commissioner, Legal Services Board and Commissioner, Victoria
Merete Smith, CEO, Norwegian Bar
Ben Martin Hobbs, Legal Services Board and Commissioner, Victoria
Ben Farrow, CEO and Co-founder, Firm Checker
Tracy Vegro, Executive Director, Strategy and Innovation, SRA