Subscribe to our newsletter

Do you enjoy reading our newsletter? Consider joining our mailing list, and we will send you our monthly newsletter straight to your inbox.

Subscribe

From the Horse’s Mouth: “Should You Use AI for Legal Advice?”

by | General Interest

“If you didn’t hear it from the horse’s mouth, it came from the other end of the horse.” (Anon)

The rapid rise of AI is hard to ignore. DeepSeek’s AI assistant, only launched on 10 January this year, has grown to rival ChatGPT in popularity, making it the most widely used AI language model at the time of writing. But DeepSeek isn’t alone in the race – major players like Copilot, Gemini 2.0, OpenAI o3, Meta AI, Grok, Anthropic and the like are all vying for our attention. The competition is fierce, and we’re spoilt for choice!

With AI becoming an integral part of so many aspects of our lives, it’s no surprise that some of us might be tempted to turn to these models for legal help. We decided to ask ChatGPT itself how it feels about that, and what follows is its unedited response. Direct from the horse’s mouth!

Our question to ChatGPT

“With the current high levels of public interest in using AI to answer questions, would you recommend that people without legal training use AI to answer legal questions and to provide legal advice on specific topics?”

ChatGPT said:

“AI is a powerful tool, but when it comes to legal advice, caution is essential. While AI can summarize laws, explain legal concepts, and assist with research, it cannot replace the expertise of a qualified attorney.

The risks of relying on AI for legal advice
  1. Lack of context: AI provides general information, but legal issues are highly fact-specific. What applies in one case may not apply in another.
  2. Potential for inaccuracy: AI models pull from vast datasets but do not verify legal updates, jurisdictional differences, or recent court rulings. This can lead to outdated or incorrect advice.
  3. No professional liability: If AI provides incorrect guidance, there is no recourse. Attorneys, on the other hand, are professionally accountable for the advice they give.
Ethical and confidentiality concerns: Sharing sensitive legal matters with AI platforms can pose risks, as they do not guarantee attorney-client privilege or data security.

Where AI can help
  • Basic legal information: Understanding general legal principles, terminology, and procedures.
  • Document review assistance: AI can help summarize contracts or flag potential issues but should not replace a lawyer’s review.
  • Legal research: AI speeds up finding relevant case law or statutes, but attorneys must verify accuracy and applicability.
The key takeaways
  • AI is a useful tool for research and general legal understanding, but not for personalised legal advice.
  • Only a qualified attorney can provide case-specific guidance, apply legal reasoning, and ensure compliance with current laws.
  • For critical legal matters, always consult a professional – mistakes can be costly.
In short, AI can support legal education but should never be a substitute for expert legal counsel. If in doubt, always seek professional advice.”
A last thought or two from us…

In a South African context, we have found inaccuracy to be even more of a risk than it is internationally – no doubt because of the relatively limited online coverage our local laws enjoy. For example, a test question on a relatively simple aspect of South African law resulted in the bot quoting New Zealand legislation back to the asker! What’s more, there are already media reports of South African lawyers finding themselves in hot water after not thoroughly checking technical AI output (and rightly so!).

Whatever you use AI for, be really careful that its answers are factually and technically accurate before relying on them. As ChatGPT itself says under every question field: “ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.”

AI is a useful tool that may be able to point you in the right direction, but it can never replace a human being – let alone a qualified lawyer. Relying on AI for legal advice could be the worst decision you ever make.

Disclaimer: The information provided herein should not be used or relied on as professional advice. No liability can be accepted for any errors or omissions nor for any loss or damage arising from reliance upon any information herein. Always contact us for specific and detailed advice.

© LawDotNews

More Articles

Renegotiating After You’ve Signed: The Email That Ended a Property Sale

Renegotiating After You’ve Signed: The Email That Ended a Property Sale

After their bond was withdrawn, the buyers were given time to arrange new finance. Instead, one of them emailed the conveyancer saying they would only apply for another bond after the seller repaired an alleged defect or agreed to reduce the price. The seller understood this to mean that the buyers would not proceed on the terms they had already accepted. She cancelled the sale, and the High Court agreed that she was entitled to do so. The buyers lost the sale and the money already paid and faced further financial consequences.

Was it Even His Signature? How to Overturn a Fraudulent Will

Was it Even His Signature? How to Overturn a Fraudulent Will

It’s unfortunately all too common a tale. Out of the blue, an older person, rendered vulnerable by age or illness, acquires a new “friend”. Before anyone in the family realises what’s going on, their loved one has died, and the fraudster claims to be sole heir in terms of a last-minute will. No surprise then that our courts must often determine whether a deceased person’s last will was tainted by incapacity, undue influence, fraud, or even forgery. The sad tale of a 90-year-old man who left behind two conflicting wills is a good example of how our courts approach these situations.

Employ a Foreign National? What You Must Check Now, and What Could Change

Employ a Foreign National? What You Must Check Now, and What Could Change

Under the current law, it is already illegal to employ someone who is not legally entitled to work in South Africa. This applies to businesses and to households employing foreign domestic workers, nannies or gardeners. A new Bill proposes additional duties and higher penalties for employers, but these changes are not yet law. Employers should therefore comply with the existing law and remain alert to the proposed changes.