When AI Goes Wrong in Law

On one hand, AI is unlocking extraordinary gains in productivity, insight and speed. On the other, it introduces a new category of risk — one that feels unfamiliar, uncomfortable, and, at times, very public when things go wrong. 

We’ve already seen examples of lawyers relying on AI-generated content that turned out to be inaccurate. The instinctive reaction in many organisations is predictable: tighten control, assign blame, and retreat to safer ground. 

But the law firms and legal departments that will lead the next decade of legal practice will take a very different approach. 

They will treat these moments not as failures to punish — but as inflection points for growth.   At Laurence Simons (LS) we speak to lawyers and compliance professionals everyday when working on mandates for clients and when providing insight and advice for those who are wanting to enrich their careers and their teams. As such, we are well placed to know what great legal leadership looks like and how careers are never linear.  

The reality: mistakes are not new — only the mechanism is.

Let’s be clear: lawyers have always made mistakes. 

AI has not introduced error into the profession. It has simply changed how errors can occur — and in some cases, how quickly they surface. 

This distinction matters. 

Because if we respond to AI-related errors as something fundamentally different, we risk over-correcting — and in doing so, we suppress the very innovation that will define high-performing legal teams. 

The leadership test: what do you do when it goes wrong? 

The defining characteristic of strong legal leadership in the AI era is not whether mistakes happen.

It’s how leaders choose to respond when they do.

1. Move from blame to responsibility

There is always individual accountability in legal practice — and there should be. 

But focusing solely on who made the mistake misses the more important question: 

What allowed this to happen? 

Blame isolates. Responsibility builds systems. 

The leaders who get this right don’t excuse mistakes — they expand the lens through which they understand them. 

2. Treat errors as signals, not setbacks 

Every AI-related mistake contains valuable information: 

In this sense, mistakes are not just incidents — they are diagnostic tools. 

Leaders who create space to analyse, rather than react, turn isolated errors into organisational intelligence. 

3. Create psychological safety without lowering standards 

This is the balance many law firms and legal departments struggle with. 

If mistakes are punished harshly: 

If mistakes are tolerated without accountability: 

The answer is not to choose between the two — but to hold both: 

“We take standards seriously. And we take learning just as seriously.” 

When lawyers know they can surface issues early, without disproportionate consequence, the organisation becomes safer — not riskier. 

For the individual lawyer: how mistakes shape careers 

Mistakes happen.   

Because when something goes wrong — particularly in a profession built on precision — the instinct is often self-protection, or worse, self-doubt. 

But in reality, how a lawyer responds to a mistake often becomes a defining moment in their career. 

1. Credibility is built in response, not perfection 

No lawyer operates without error over a long career. 

What distinguishes the best is not flawless execution — it’s how they respond under pressure: 

Paradoxically, these moments often increase trust, not diminish it. 

2. Judgment is refined through experience — including failure 

AI introduces a new layer to professional judgment: 

• When to trust it 
• When to question it 
• When to ignore it 

That judgment cannot be learned purely in theory. 

It is developed through exposure — including moments where things don’t go as expected. 

A lawyer who has seen how AI can mislead, and internalised that lesson, becomes more robust, not less. 

3. Adaptability becomes a career accelerator 

The legal profession is entering a period where technical excellence alone is not enough. 

The lawyers who will stand out are those who: 

Handled well, a mistake with AI is not a setback — it is an early step in building that adaptability. 

A mindset shift for the profession 

We are moving from a world where expertise was defined by what you know… 

…to one where it is defined by how you think, how you verify, and how you adapt. 

AI doesn’t replace legal judgment. If anything, it raises the bar for it. 

And that means leaders have a choice. 

They can create environments where: 

Or they can build cultures where: 

The firms that succeed in the AI era won’t be the ones that avoid mistakes entirely.  They will be the ones that respond to them intelligently.  Because in a profession built on precedent, perhaps it’s time we set a new one: