18.11.2025
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming the legal profession across Europe, including Malta. This transformation brings both exciting opportunities and complex challenges, particularly as new regulations like the EU AI Act take effect. With the widespread adoption of AI tools, the legal profession must carefully consider the role of human judgment, ethical boundaries, and the importance of maintaining trust in legal processes.[1]
Computational Intelligence: A New Legal Paradigm
Prominent AI researchers such as Blaise Agüera y Arcas, proposes that intelligence, whether biological or artificial, fundamentally involves computation, prediction and the cooperative ability to solve complex problems.[2] In the legal profession, these predictive and analytical abilities are being harnessed by advanced AI systems to conduct rapid document review, due diligence, predictive litigation analytics and even support contract drafting.[3] Rather than being a replacement for human judgement, AI augments the capacity of lawyers by enabling faster, more thorough data processing[4]—a development especially relevant for firms handling vast volumes of documentation or cross-jurisdictional research.[5]
Regulation and Ethics: The Imperative of Trust
The EU AI Act establishes a risk-based regulatory framework designed to promote the safe, transparent and responsible use of AI. Given the routine handling of confidential information in legal practice, transparency and human oversight are critical to safeguarding data privacy and upholding ethical standards. These principles are essential to foster and maintain public trust and professional confidence in AI-supported legal services.
Locally, the President of the Malta Chamber of Advocates, called for the establishment of an AI regulatory body during his speech at the start of the Forensic Year.[6] He emphasized that AI is a "dangerous tool if not regulated" and highlighted its impact on the legal profession and on the law course at the University of Malta.[7] Incidentally the adoption of AI in the legal realm coincides with ongoing discussions with the University of Malta concerning proposals to reform the course’s curriculum.
It is no longer sufficient to comprehend contracts and be well versed in civil procedure. Legal professionals must therefore invest in continual education, implement robust certification processes, and foster peer oversight to ensure AI technologies enhance rather than undermine legal integrity.[8] This will enable legal practitioners to understand how algorithms crunch data, while becoming aware of the reality of machine learning biases and the increasingly pertinent ethical issues that consequently arise.[9] Therefore, lawyers should acquire AI literacy, not to become coders, but to be knowledgeable users of these tools.
AI in Court: Real-World Lessons on Reliability
Reference may be made to the cases of: (1) Frederick Ayinde vs The London Borough of Haringey[10] and (2) Hamad Al-Haroun vs Qatar National Bank QPSC and QNB Capital LLC[11] whereby the UK Divisional Court ruled on the submission of fictitious cases generated by AI tools like ChatGPT.[12] The judge warned that lawyers could face criminal charges if they rely on fictitious AI-generated cases when presenting written arguments in court.[13]
Justice Victoria Sharp P. clearly states that:
‘Freely available generative artificial intelligence tools, trained on a large language model such as ChatGPT are not capable of conducting reliable legal research. Such tools can produce apparently coherent and plausible responses to prompts, but those coherent and plausible responses may turn out to be entirely incorrect. The responses may make confident assertions that are simply untrue. They may cite sources that do not exist. They may purport to quote passages from a genuine source that do not appear in that source.’[14]
The Court sternly warns against the unreliability of AI legal research that can lead to professional misconduct, wasted costs, and damage to the administration of justice. It is imperative that AI must in no way replace lawyers’ duty to verify their legal research and to abide by ethical obligations.
Conclusion: A Partnership of Human and AI
AI-powered tools hold great promise in widening access to justice by making routine legal services more affordable and efficient. Automated chatbots and document drafting tools can expedite client interactions and minimize costs.
Ultimately, AI’s role in law should be seen as one of collaboration rather than replacement. The future of legal practice depends on combining AI’s powerful analytical abilities with human judgment, ethics, and long-standing principles of justice and fairness. As regulatory and ethical frameworks continue to mature, the legal profession has a key opportunity to lead in shaping AI’s trajectory—ensuring technology supports the rule of law in ways that are transparent, accountable and just.
Author : Dr Matthew Cassar
[1] https://www.uianet.org/en/news/eu-ai-act-2025-what-lawyers-need-know
[2] https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/09/artificial-intelligence-may-not-be-artificial/
[3] https://www.clio.com/blog/ai-legal-document-review/
[4] https://www.moduleq.com/blog/how-ai-augmentation-is-transforming-the-legal-industry
[5] https://www.datagrid.com/blog/ai-agents-automate-multi-jurisdictional-legal-research
[6] https://www.maltatoday.com.mt/news/national/137324/chamber_of_advocates_wants_ai_regulatory_body
[7] Ibid.
[8] Latest wave of obligations under the EU AI Act take effect: Key considerations <https://www.dlapiper.com/en/insights/publications/2025/08/latest-wave-of-obligations-under-the-eu-ai-act-take-effect>
[9] https://blog.prevail.ai/cle-ai-preparing-lawyers-5/
[10] https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2025/1383.html&query=(Ayinde)+AND+(v)+AND+(Haringey)+AND+(.2025.)+AND+(EWHC)+AND+(1383)+AND+((Admin))#disp9
[11] Ibid.
[12] https://www.ibanet.org/Technology-UK-judge-warns-lawyers-about-risks-of-AI-use-in-court
[13] Ibid.
[14] https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2025/1383.html&query=(Ayinde)+AND+(v)+AND+(Haringey)+AND+(.2025.)+AND+(EWHC)+AND+(1383)+AND+((Admin))#disp9