AI and the Good Enough Lawyer

There’s a lot of discussion in the legal world of the impact of AI, and how it will impact lawyers and people’s use of lawyers.

One of the aspects that’s not discussed much is how AI can demystify things. Lawyers have always benefited from mystique: not mystique in the sense of hidden excitement, but mystique because the lawyer’s skillset seemed to draw on a knowledge base that most people found obscure.

You don’t get mystique with AI. You ask a question, and you – very quickly, and much faster than just about any lawyer – get an answer.

The downside is that LLMs are probabilistic.  LLMs take the view that 2 + 2 is overwhelmingly likely to be 4.

But, if you combine that downside with the concept of “good enough”, then it doesn’t look so bad.

Unlike just about every business discipline, lawyers have traditionally avoided the concept of good enough and aimed for perfection. Well, you would do if you are paid by the hour.

But, if you think of buying legal services in the same way you think of buying a suit, then AI’s probabilistic nature becomes more acceptable.

You can buy a suit from Primark, Marks & Spencer, or Savile Row. It’s obvious which one is going to produce the best fit, but not many of us buy from Savile Row.

So, if you are a buyer of legal services, and are comfortable with the concept of good enough and 2 + 2 being overwhelmingly likely to be 4, then depending on the specific deal or issue, AI could be the right lawyer for you.

14th April 2026