När den artificiella intelligensen tar över - Särskilt om ansvar vid en due diligence
(2020) JURM02 20202Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Idag befinner vi oss i den så kallade fjärde industriella revolutionen, ett begrepp myntat av Klaus Schwab som är grundare och styrelseordförande av World Economic Forum. Uppgifter och funktioner som tidigare förlitat sig på den mänskliga arbetskraften kan idag automatiseras och förenklas med hjälp av artificiell intelligens. Inom advokatverksamheten har artificiell intelligens använts som komplement till juristernas arbete, framförallt inom dokumentgranskning i due diligence. Syftet med en due diligence är att köparen ska få tillräcklig kunskap om målbolaget, så att de eventuella riskerna kan fördelas mellan köpare och säljare.
AI-systemen är mer effektiva än juristerna och har en lägre felmarginal. Advokatbyråns tjänster kan därför... (More) - Idag befinner vi oss i den så kallade fjärde industriella revolutionen, ett begrepp myntat av Klaus Schwab som är grundare och styrelseordförande av World Economic Forum. Uppgifter och funktioner som tidigare förlitat sig på den mänskliga arbetskraften kan idag automatiseras och förenklas med hjälp av artificiell intelligens. Inom advokatverksamheten har artificiell intelligens använts som komplement till juristernas arbete, framförallt inom dokumentgranskning i due diligence. Syftet med en due diligence är att köparen ska få tillräcklig kunskap om målbolaget, så att de eventuella riskerna kan fördelas mellan köpare och säljare.
AI-systemen är mer effektiva än juristerna och har en lägre felmarginal. Advokatbyråns tjänster kan därför bli markant billigare om rådgivning är baserad resultat från artificiell intelligens. AI-systemen är trots sina låga felmarginaler, inte utan begränsningar. Det är därför möjligt att klienten orsakas skada på grund av att systemen missat rättsligt relevant information. Vid skada orsakad av advokaten är det även möjligt att rådgivningsansvaret aktualiseras. Frågan blir således hur rådgivningsansvaret ska bedömas i fall då artificiell intelligens använts istället för mänskliga jurister? Systemen bör ses som ett arbetsverktyg som advokaten använt sig av och advokaten bör därför vara den som ansvarar för det råd som AI-systemet producerat. I fråga om advokatens oaktsamhet bör hänsyn tas till hur AI-systemet använts och på vilket sätt klienten informerats om de eventuella begränsningar och medföljande risker som systemet kan medföra. Det är således inte en tillräcklig förutsättning att AI-system inte är en traditionell arbetsmetod för att advokaten ska ha agerat oaktsam. För att advokaten ska kunna minska risken för att åläggas rådgivningsansvar är det därför av vikt att rådgivningen förmedlas på ett pedagogiskt sätt med eventuella risker som kan medföras vid användandet av AI-system. (Less) - Abstract
- We are today in, what is called, the fourth industrial revolution. A term coined by Klaus Schwab, founder and Chairman of the Board of the World Economic Forum. Tasks and functions that have previously relied on the human workforce can today be automated and simplified by the help of artificial intelligence. Within the field of lawyers, artificial intelligence is being used as a compliment to the work of lawyers where artificial intelligence has above all been frequently used for document review during due diligence. The purpose of a due diligence is that the buyer is to gain sufficient knowledge of the target company, so that the known risks of purchasing the company can be divided between the buyer and the seller.
The systems are... (More) - We are today in, what is called, the fourth industrial revolution. A term coined by Klaus Schwab, founder and Chairman of the Board of the World Economic Forum. Tasks and functions that have previously relied on the human workforce can today be automated and simplified by the help of artificial intelligence. Within the field of lawyers, artificial intelligence is being used as a compliment to the work of lawyers where artificial intelligence has above all been frequently used for document review during due diligence. The purpose of a due diligence is that the buyer is to gain sufficient knowledge of the target company, so that the known risks of purchasing the company can be divided between the buyer and the seller.
The systems are more effective than lawyers and have a lower margin of error. The law firm’s services can therefore be significantly cheaper if the given advice is based on results from artificial intelligence. AI-systems are not without its limits, despite their lower margin of error. It is therefore possible that the client is suffers damages due to the system overlooking legally relevant information. In case of damage caused by the lawyer, it is possible that the advisory responsibility of a lawyer is made current. The question is there for how the advisory responsibility of a lawyer should be assessed when artificial intelligence has been used instead of human lawyers? The systems should be viewed as tools that a lawyer uses and therefor the lawyer should be the one who is responsible for the advice produced by the AI-system. How the AI-systems have been used and in what way the clients have been informed of any limits and risks that the system could entail, should be taken into consideration in regard to the lawyer’s negligence. It is therefore not a sufficient condition that AI-systems are not a traditional working method for the lawyer to have acted negligently. To minimize the risks of being imposed advisory responsibility, it is important that the advice is conveyed in an educational manner with any risks that can be entailed by using AI-systems. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9034605
- author
- Belfrage, Angela LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- When the AI-systems take over - A liability investigation in a due diligence
- course
- JURM02 20202
- year
- 2020
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- avtalsrätt, förmögenhetsrätt, skadeståndsrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9034605
- date added to LUP
- 2021-01-30 14:09:18
- date last changed
- 2021-01-30 14:09:18
@misc{9034605,
abstract = {{We are today in, what is called, the fourth industrial revolution. A term coined by Klaus Schwab, founder and Chairman of the Board of the World Economic Forum. Tasks and functions that have previously relied on the human workforce can today be automated and simplified by the help of artificial intelligence. Within the field of lawyers, artificial intelligence is being used as a compliment to the work of lawyers where artificial intelligence has above all been frequently used for document review during due diligence. The purpose of a due diligence is that the buyer is to gain sufficient knowledge of the target company, so that the known risks of purchasing the company can be divided between the buyer and the seller.
The systems are more effective than lawyers and have a lower margin of error. The law firm’s services can therefore be significantly cheaper if the given advice is based on results from artificial intelligence. AI-systems are not without its limits, despite their lower margin of error. It is therefore possible that the client is suffers damages due to the system overlooking legally relevant information. In case of damage caused by the lawyer, it is possible that the advisory responsibility of a lawyer is made current. The question is there for how the advisory responsibility of a lawyer should be assessed when artificial intelligence has been used instead of human lawyers? The systems should be viewed as tools that a lawyer uses and therefor the lawyer should be the one who is responsible for the advice produced by the AI-system. How the AI-systems have been used and in what way the clients have been informed of any limits and risks that the system could entail, should be taken into consideration in regard to the lawyer’s negligence. It is therefore not a sufficient condition that AI-systems are not a traditional working method for the lawyer to have acted negligently. To minimize the risks of being imposed advisory responsibility, it is important that the advice is conveyed in an educational manner with any risks that can be entailed by using AI-systems.}},
author = {{Belfrage, Angela}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{När den artificiella intelligensen tar över - Särskilt om ansvar vid en due diligence}},
year = {{2020}},
}