Morning round-up

Morning round-up: Wednesday 22 June

By on

The morning’s top legal affairs news stories


Joshua Rozenberg: What are the legal implications if Britain votes leave? [The Guardian]

Robot power strengthens legal services [Financial Times]

New British judge chosen for European court of human rights [The Guardian]

EU law expert Michael Dougan’s video on Brexit risks goes viral [The Irish News]

Phone-tapping ban for lawyers not absolute, rules top court [Ars Technica]

Stockton Council will review relationship with Baker Small law firm [GazetteLive]

How to ban referendums: the Referendum Banning Act 2016 [Jack of Kent blog]

6 things about employment law that could change forever after Brexit [Wales Online]

Taylor Swift joins copyright law plea [BBC News]

Judge Rinder: ‘I wish I could use more Yiddish in the courtroom’ [Jewish News]

Russia rules out Olympic boycott but may take legal action against IAAF [The Guardian]

Training contract applications are now being accepted at Burges Salmon [Legal Cheek Hub]

“The rules of entry to the bar already permit non-graduates to enter the GDL/BPTC on a case-by-case basis. I don’t *quite* see how, given the limited number of barristers in practice that a super exam such as the one proposed can be cost-effective for either the BSB or for entrants taking the exam…” [Legal Cheek comments]

1 Comment

Not Amused

We all know the Susskind-esque nonsense about AI replacing lawyers is nonsense. My highly developed phone can’t even avoid a simple typo.

But where automation may actually help. For my whole professional life the court system has been a total shambles. Successive over confident and fundamentally incompetent judges have done a comedy interpretation of Nero and screwed it up even more. Jackson is merely the current moron in chief.

Why not automate the court system and the procedure rules? If pleadings were loaded electronically then AI could populate directions automatically with an option for either party to amend, approve amends or request a judge. If the Court file was available to parties like Dropbox then they could file documents cheaply and with the added comfort of them actually arriving instead of being lost.


Comments are closed.