ÀÏ˾»úÎçÒ¹¸£Àû

Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury considers some aspects likely to emerge from the increased use of artificial intelligence in decision-making in dispute resolution.

Challenges

As the keynote speaker at the opening of day 2 of London International Disputes Week 2023 (LIDW 23), the former President of the Supreme Court, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury considered the challenges coming ‘around the corner’ for the dispute resolution community.

In a wide-ranging speech, he assessed the UK’s current standing in the world in the dispute resolution world, which he rated as strong despite challenges from several other dispute resolution centres. He attributed the continuing prominence of the UK to a number of well-recognised factors. These included the common law, the recognition given to the City of London in the financial and commercial worlds, the widespread use of English language and the worldwide reputation of the judiciary and arbitrators working from London.

This blog refers to the issues Lord Neuberger raised about artificial intelligence.

Use of artificial intelligence

The theme of LIDW 23  is of adapting to a changing world. One of the main aspects discussed by Lord Neuberger was the increased use of artificial intelligence. Discussion of this subject had been given unmissable recent prominence in the media but, as yet, has been touched on only in a limited way among dispute resolution practitioners.

Lord Neuberger indicated that dispute resolution lawyers have used what he termed ‘basic AI’ for years in aspects such as keyword searching in disclosure and research through case retrieval systems. Its use could now expand rapidly well beyond these.

An aspect which would be of concern for many practitioners and their clients regarding the intervention of artificial intelligence is its use in a generative manner in case decision-making. With the likelihood of more extensive online dispute resolution systems not too far away, it is not contestable that case determination can become much quicker, cheaper and more efficient than it currently is. The touchstone, however, was whether it would be acceptable to users.

Lack of reasons and acceptance

Using artificial intelligence to analyse legal and factual disputes would bring about a speedier outcome but it would not necessarily be able to explain the process by which the outcome had been determined. The reasoning for a decision was often a key aspect of participants’ satisfaction with the result. Reasons given for a decision were of interest to winning parties; even more so, they were pivotal to whether the loser accepted the decision. Explanations also, of course, fuel the system of precedent in the court system.

For court users and those who choose arbitration, transparency about the process and acceptance of its end point are linked ideas. Artificial intelligence threatens both. But, in time, users of case resolution methods involving artificial intelligence may become accustomed to it and accept its output just as they generally do for human decision-making at present.

A conclusion    

Lord Neuberger concluded his talk to the LIDW 23 audience by stating that it was always right to look for ways to streamline methods of dispute resolution. The use of artificial intelligence should be viewed in this light. It was correct to view both forced changes and discretionary improvements as aspects of a fast-moving world.

Note: this is a summary of parts of the speech and does not purport to be a full account.