Machine learning has a valuable role to play in legal disputes. Legal technology is increasing efficiency, reducing delays and lowering costs by making legal services more accessible than ever. And whether or not it’s approved by most people, artificial intelligence is gradually starting to play an important role in the legal system and dispensing justice.

Lawyer365 (UK)
Lawyer365 brings teleconsulting to law with a digital app providing access to free legal information services and free appointments with qualified lawyers, straight from your smartphone. Lawyer 365 lets you see a lawyer by video 365 days a year in minutes.

Legal document templates are available, including hundreds of editable agreements and contracts to enable you to protect your business and keep up with your legal and compliance requirements.

The company has raised $1.8M in funding over two rounds, including a seed round in April 2022.

Avokaado (Estonia)
If there’s one workplace task begging for legal automation, it’s the drafting of legal documentation. Avokaado has developed automated templates that can draft even the most complex documents and contracts up to 98% faster.

The company raised €700,000 in pre-seed funding in 2021.

Chi Odia Paga (Italy)
Cybercrimes happen every day, but the laws in many countries are decades behind rapidly evolving technology. In Italy, conduct such as stalking, revenge porn, defamation, and threats, if prosecuted, can result in fines and even prison sentences.

Chi Odia Paga offers a quick and functional digital service to fight hate online and help people who have suffered legally prosecutable conduct obtain justice and adequate compensation, all without upfront payments.

Eperoto (Sweden)
Legal disputes can have enormous financial and emotional challenges for all parties involved. Swedish startup Eperoto was founded in 2020 and has developed an easy-to-use software tool to help those in legal disputes to attain a structured analysis of the potential courses of action. This enables users to make rational and informed decisions whether in a local court or international arbitration case.

The company has raised $351.6K in funding over three rounds, with a pre-seed round in 2021.

DeepJudge (Switzerland)
Law firms typically work on hundreds of documents per case, which are nothing short of unwieldy and time-consuming. DeepJudge AG is a spin-off of ETH Zurich focusing on the contextual understanding and processing of legal documents.

Its technology combines Deep Learning and Natural Language Processing to create more comprehensive documents. For example, it automatically highlights crucial information in documents, referencing with relevant external data such as legal codes, court rulings, commercial registries, encyclopedias and etc.

Uncover (The Netherlands)
Dutch startup Uncover has developed software to help litigation lawyers through every step of court preparation. Leveraging AI, Uncover software can readily process large amounts of documentation and, for example, accurately identify relevant events to generate a timeline, which is often a foundation for building a solid legal case.

Conny (Germany)
Berlin-based Conny was founded in 2016 and has built a tech platform that makes consumer legal claims. Whether you’re fighting a rent increase, bond return, or unlawful termination at work, Conny strives to make the process as easy and fast as ordering a pizza. Its software checks possible claims and the chances of success free of charge in the shortest possible time, and it usually only costs you if you win your case.

The company raised an undisclosed Series A in 2019.

The problem started in 2019, when Amazon and Future became business partners. The U.S. company invested $200 million in a gift voucher unit of the Indian group.

According to Amazon, that deal came with certain non-compete clauses that prohibited Future from selling retail assets to certain rivals. They also include Reliance, run by Mukesh Ambani. The deal also included clauses for settlement of any disputes under rules laid down by the Singapore International Arbitration Centre.

In 2020, Future was hit hard by the COVID-19 pandemic and decided to sell assets to Reliance. Amazon then approached Singapore arbitrators and successfully stopped the sale.

Both parties have challenged each other with lawsuits in Indian courts, including the Supreme Court, since the “seat of arbitration” remains in New Delhi and Indian law governs the proceedings.

The conflict was carried to India’s antitrust agency (Competition Commission of India (CCI).  Future complained that Amazon was making incorrect and contradictory submissions about the intent of the 2019 deal.

Amazon said it never concealed any information. Last December the company accused  CCI of suspending its approval of the 2019 deal with Future, saying there was “a deliberate design on the part of Amazon to suppress the actual scope” of the deal and its interest in Future’s retail businesses.

While Amazon contends the CCI acted beyond its powers, Future maintains the U.S company no longer has any right to assert its claims as the 2019 deal itself now lacks regulatory approval.

This month the Delhi High Court halted the Singapore arbitration proceedings between the two sides in light of the Indian antitrust decision. However,  Amazon has appealed the decisions in Indian courts which are yet to hear the matter.

The rules would replace current interim legislation that allows the voluntary reporting of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) with a legal obligation to recognise, report and remove it.  EU home affairs commissioner Ylva Johansson told Germany’s Welt am Sonntag newspaper:

“I will propose legislation in the coming months that will require companies to detect, report, and remove child sexual abuse.”

The parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp – Meta, would be particularly affected by any change in regulations, added Johansson. The company currently accounts for around 95 per cent of child sexual abuse notifications.

In 2020, internet service providers and social media platforms in the EU filed 22 million reports of child sexual abuse. This is thought to be just a fraction of the actual number of incidents.

According to a 2020 report by the Internet Watch Foundation, France, Latvia, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands appear among the top ten countries hosting child sexual abuse URLs.  Of those, the Netherlands was by far the leader, playing host to over 117,000 CSAM web pages.

• Improving security to missile-proof level. Yes, customers’ data, identities, and money are not a minor thing, and they are at risk with every login or transaction. Security bullet-proof is not enough. Hackers won’t quit, but clear and legal guarantees and better security must be offered to clients. If crimes like stealing sensitive data, frauds derived from the malicious use of such data, stealing of money, etc. keep affecting customers, it will be hard to make them jump on-board a digital-only bank. Especially the older generations.
• Getting customers’ trust. Disruptive technology is not easy to digest. Especially when your pension, savings, and money in general, is at risk. Security in the terms we described is totally necessary for customers to trust. To accept technology requires to be trained on it and to clearly understand it; How does it work? What risks do I face? How can I protect myself to avoid risks? What kind of guarantees do I have? Customers rely a lot on the face-to-face interaction at banks; making them accept the transition to banks where everything is managed through computers, smartphones, applications, robots, chatbots, codes, passwords, clicks etc won’t be easy without offering proper guarantees of protection, legal regulation. Not only financial institutions but also governments must be involved.
• Customers’ experience. A transparent, comfortable, and friendly online experience must be offered to customers. Clear guidance must be included to execute the different bank processes customers need. Technology is astonishing. No doubt almost everything can be done through it. But there is a human factor involved that should not be forgotten. Not all customers manage digital tools with the same proficiency level. There should be ways to make them feel protected, supported. It can be really frustrating to try to solve a problem with a bot that just repeats pre-programmed answers.