Artificial Intelligence and Legal Practice in Jordan: Opportunities, Risks, and Recommendations

The legal sector has undergone a significant transformation with the introduction of artificial intelligence technologies, which have reshaped the nature of legal services, including legal consultations, contract drafting, and dispute analysis. A lawyer's role is no longer limited to legal knowledge alone; it increasingly requires the ability to use digital tools responsibly, without either relying on them entirely or rejecting them altogether, while also assessing the gaps and risks that may arise from their use and potentially be exploited by an opposing party.

First: How Artificial Intelligence Is Transforming Legal Services

Artificial intelligence has reshaped legal services through a number of applications, including:

1. Automation of routine legal work: Such as preparing initial contract drafts, reviewing documents, extracting legal data, and assisting with drafting.
2. Legal data analysis: Files, facts, and legal cases can be uploaded for analysis, potentially reducing time and effort. However, questions remain regarding the accuracy of the analysis and whether it is based on sound legal principles applicable to the facts presented.
3. Digital legal services: Some platforms allow individuals and companies to obtain immediate or near-immediate legal information or preliminary consultations, in addition to providing ready-made legal templates.
4. Customer service and automated responses: Some companies use automated systems to handle customer inquiries and provide initial assistance. However, such systems remain limited in their ability to address complex interactions, making referral to a qualified employee more appropriate where careful understanding and continuous follow-up are required.

These developments have helped accelerate certain processes and reduce costs, but they have also raised issues affecting the core of legal practice and created risks and potential liabilities that users may avoid by reviewing and critically assessing AI-generated outputs.

Second: Challenges of Relying on Artificial Intelligence for Contract Drafting and Customer Service

1. Limited understanding of contractual context: Although AI can generate legal text that appears formally sound, it does not necessarily understand the parties' true intentions or all circumstances surrounding the contract, factors that may directly affect its content and the appropriate contractual provisions.
2. Reliance on general patterns rather than the specifics of each case: AI systems may generate language based on general patterns that do not adequately reflect the client's particular interests and objectives. Developing tailored drafting that accounts for the facts, risks, and legal interests of the client requires human expertise and professional judgment.
3. Risks of inaccurate drafting: Reliance on AI-generated outputs may result in ambiguous or inconsistent contractual language, since each legal system has its own requirements and each contract has its own circumstances and terminology. Essential provisions, such as arbitration, force majeure, or jurisdiction clauses, may also be omitted or drafted in a manner inconsistent with the intended purpose or applicable law.
4. Legal characterization of the contract: AI may draft a contract without accurately determining its legal nature. Depending on the actual facts, a relationship may constitute employment or a contract for services, agency or partnership. Likewise, selecting the appropriate legal form of a company and determining its incorporation and registration requirements requires examination of the relevant facts and legal provisions. Such characterization affects the applicable law and the legal consequences of the relationship.
5. Challenges in legal contract analysis: Contract analysis is not limited to reading clauses; it also involves interpretation, risk assessment, and, where appropriate, linking the contract to legislation and judicial precedents. AI-generated interpretations may be general or inconsistent with national law. For example, a particular clause may be acceptable in an international contract while being subject to different restrictions or rules under Jordanian law, increasing the risks associated with cross-border contracts.
6. Use of AI in customer service: Some companies use automated systems to answer customer inquiries and provide initial guidance in order to reduce pressure on employees. However, these systems may be unable to handle complex situations or precise questions requiring a comprehensive dialogue and continuous follow-up. They may also provide general or inaccurate answers, ultimately requiring the intervention of a qualified employee.

Third: Benefits of Using Artificial Intelligence

Despite the risks and criticisms associated with artificial intelligence, its responsible and controlled use can provide several benefits, including:

1. Lower costs: Some AI tools can provide legal functions or services at relatively low cost through free services, monthly subscriptions, or other payment models, potentially making certain services accessible to a broader range of users.
2. Speed and efficiency: AI can assist in preparing initial documents and answering general questions quickly, and it can be used at any time without being limited to traditional working hours.
3. Reduced pressure on human staff: AI can provide preliminary information and supporting analysis, allowing professionals to devote more time to tasks that require legal judgment and professional expertise while benefiting from modern digital tools.

Fourth: Artificial Intelligence and Legal Services under Jordanian Law

The development of artificial intelligence technologies creates opportunities for greater speed and efficiency, but it also raises legal issues when applied within the Jordanian legal environment, particularly in relation to liability, contractual validity, confidentiality, and data protection.

1. Legal liability: Jordanian civil law does not treat artificial intelligence as an independent legal person. Legal responsibility remains attributable to natural or legal persons in accordance with the applicable legal rules. Article 256 of the Jordanian Civil Code establishes a general rule requiring a person who causes harm to another to provide compensation for the resulting damage, subject to the text and conditions governing its application. Accordingly, the occurrence of harm resulting from the use of an AI tool does not, by itself, transfer liability to the technological system; the responsible person or entity must be determined according to the facts and applicable legal rules. Describing an error as technological is not, by itself, sufficient to exclude liability where its legal elements are established.
2. Contractual validity: Reliance on AI in contract drafting raises issues concerning consent and the parties' understanding of the contract. Article 90 of the Jordanian Civil Code provides that a contract is concluded once offer and acceptance correspond, subject to any additional formalities required by law. The use of an AI tool in drafting does not, in itself, invalidate a contract. However, if a party relies on automatically generated text without understanding its content, the circumstances may raise issues concerning mistake or defects in consent. Ambiguous or contradictory language may also lead to disputes over contractual interpretation.
3. Legal characterization of the contract: Legal characterization requires examination of the facts and the legal consequences arising from them. A relationship may be drafted in a form suggesting a contract for services while the actual facts establish an employment relationship, or vice versa. This distinction may result in the application of different legal rules and significant legal consequences.
4. Confidentiality and data protection: Entering information relating to clients, contracts, disputes, or professional secrets into AI tools may create privacy, confidentiality, and data-protection risks, depending on the platform, its terms of use, and its data-processing practices. Sensitive information should therefore not be entered into platforms that are untrusted or unclear regarding their data-protection, retention, and use policies.

Fifth: Legal Recommendations for Companies Using Artificial Intelligence in Legal Matters

In light of the issues that may arise from the use of artificial intelligence, companies, particularly those using AI in legal work, should adopt a structured and cautious approach that allows them to benefit from these technologies without exposing themselves to unnecessary legal risks. Key recommendations include:

1. Do not rely entirely on AI for drafting or reviewing contracts: AI should be treated as an assisting tool subject to specialized human review. Contracts reflect a delicate balance of interests and often require precise legal characterization and an understanding of the particular circumstances of each transaction. These functions should not be fully delegated to an automated system.
2. Establish clear internal policies governing AI use: Companies should define the permitted scope of AI use, the situations in which reliance on it is allowed, and the controls required to verify its outputs. Significant legal decisions should not be made solely on the basis of AI-generated outputs without appropriate human legal review. These safeguards can be incorporated into the company's internal governance policies.
3. Protect privacy and confidentiality: Companies should ensure that AI use does not expose client data, contracts, or ongoing disputes. This includes selecting trustworthy platforms, understanding their data-processing policies, avoiding the entry of sensitive information into unsecured systems, and adopting clear data-protection policies consistent with legal and professional obligations.
4. Review the terms of use of AI platforms: Terms of use often contain provisions that limit or exclude the provider's liability in certain circumstances. Understanding and legally reviewing these terms is therefore essential to avoid unexpected obligations or the loss of legal rights.
5. Adopt an operating model combining AI with human expertise: Technology can be used to accelerate processes and preliminary work, while qualified professionals review the results and make final decisions. This model provides a better balance between technological efficiency and legal safety.

conclusion.

Complete reliance on artificial intelligence tools for drafting or analyzing legal work is not recommended because their outputs may contain inaccuracies or lack a sufficiently deep understanding of the circumstances of a particular case. Legal services require professional judgment and human analysis combining experience, legal reasoning, and informed discretion, and these elements cannot be fully replaced by technological systems.

Our team also provides legal solutions tailored to each client's needs, taking into account the details and legal particularities of each matter, with the aim of delivering more accurate and reliable legal services. You may contact us with your inquiries to obtain appropriate legal support.