Five takeaways from Europe’s largest legal tech conference

LegalTechTalk returned to London last week, bringing together law firms, legal tech companies and AI providers from across the industry.

While discussions covered a wide range of topics, several themes emerged repeatedly over the course of the conference, from growing frustration with platform overload to increased scrutiny of AI governance and questions about how technology could reshape traditional career structures.

Too many tools

One theme surfaced repeatedly throughout the conference: lawyers are struggling with tool overload. As firms experiment with a growing number of AI products, attention is shifting from access to technology towards integration and creating a more cohesive user experience.

That shift could have significant implications for legal technology providers, particularly as firms become more selective about the products they are willing to add to their technology stacks.

Finding a place to fit in

The rise of general-purpose AI platforms is also forcing legal tech vendors to rethink their position in the market.

As platforms continue to expand their legal capabilities, many specialist providers are having to answer a difficult question: what makes them indispensable?

The answer increasingly appears to be either deep expertise in a particular area of law or the ability to solve a specific workflow exceptionally well. Litigation AI has emerged as an example, with startups such as Wexler and Crimson quickly gaining traction.

There was also a growing sense that many products will succeed by integrating with larger legal AI platforms such as Harvey or Legora rather than competing directly with them. As lawyers look to simplify their technology stacks, being part of a broader ecosystem may prove more valuable than trying to become the ecosystem itself.

Rethinking how AI is judged

One of the more interesting observations came from Baker McKenzie chief innovation officer Ben Allgrove, who argued that AI is often being assessed against perfection rather than against the reality of how legal work has historically been delivered.

On a corporate transaction, for example, an associate might previously have reviewed only a handful of comparable deals. Today, AI can analyse hundreds within minutes.

That raises a broader question for the profession. If clients are receiving analysis informed by significantly more data than was previously practical, AI is not necessarily delivering the same service more cheaply. It may be enabling a fundamentally different, and perhaps better, service despite ongoing concerns about hallucinations.

Governance moves centre stage

The focus is increasingly on governance, accountability and oversight: understanding where AI is being used, who is responsible for outputs and how firms can deploy these tools responsibly at scale.

Following some high-profile AI blunders this year involving Sullivan & Cromwell and Pinsent Masons, law firms and clients are increasingly looking beyond policy documents and asking practical questions. They want to know where AI is being used, how outputs are reviewed and who is accountable for the results.

Pressure on traditional career models

Technology's impact on legal careers also featured heavily in discussions.

Jae Um, co-founder of consultancy Lumio, predicted that traditional lockstep models could come under pressure as firms reassess how they measure experience and performance.

The legal profession has historically relied on years post-qualification as a proxy for expertise. As technology changes what individual lawyers can achieve, firms may place greater emphasis on demonstrated skills, judgement and capability rather than tenure.

The conference concluded with an announcement from organisers that LegalTechWeek will expand into the US, with Miami set to host a new event in 2027.