NEW FAMILIES OF LEGAL SYSTEMS IN TRANSITION, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR AI

Abstract

Trial was once the litmus test for legal systems, allowing one to distinguish between legal families. However, in recent decades, trial has often become the exception rather than the rule, with many legal systems prioritizing and promoting settlement. In the U.S., for example, under 1 percent of civil cases are disposed of through trial. We propose a typology that accounts for current priorities of legal systems and the main mechanisms through which they dispose of cases. The proposed typology is the result of a five-year empirical study of legal systems, analyzing data from court dockets, court observations, and interviews with legal actors. The study uncovers: 1) legal systems that have reshaped themselves to place an emphasis on pre-filing, creating disincentives to filing cases and trial while promoting settlement; 2) legal systems that place an emphasis on pretrial, allowing filing of cases but introducing incentives to help cases settle before they reach trial; and 3) legal systems that continue to place an emphasis on trial while allowing other forms of dispute resolution. We show that each family differs in the aim of civil justice, the function of law, the nature of the judicial role, access to justice, and the institutional function of courts. Moreover, a pre-filing emphasis seems conducive to AI-based dispute resolution that may be developed in the future. The typology allows for a dynamic observation of legal systems as they transition from one family to another and has implications for legal reforms and harmonization.

Keywords: Harmonization, Reform, Legal Families, Artificial Intelligence, Pretrial, ADR, Judicial Practices, Comparative Law