Access and Equity in Legal AI: What About the Rest?
Earlier last month, I attended an AI Masterclass hosted by the Legal Innovation Forum. The speakers were insightful, the chat was active, and the conversations moved quickly, from multi-agent systems to the promise of agentic AI. But as the dialogue pushed toward what’s next for law and technology, I found myself reflecting on a quieter question that didn’t receive much airtime:
What about the solo and small-firm practitioners who work without access to the same resources?
Legal AI is advancing rapidly. Many larger firms are exploring its potential, integrating tools into research, drafting, and administrative workflows. But across the broader legal profession in Canada, there’s still a wide range of experience when it comes to adopting new technologies. For solo and small-firm lawyers, in particular, high subscription costs, time constraints, and limited training resources can make these tools feel more aspirational than accessible.
The Cost of “Reliable AI”
For many, the term “AI legal research” is closely tied to proprietary platforms like LexisNexis and Westlaw. These systems are expanding to include AI-powered search, summarization, and citation tools. Features that promise speed and efficiency. But that level of access comes at a cost.
While these platforms provide powerful capabilities, not every practitioner or firm has the budget to support enterprise-level tools. For those who don’t, the divide grows: reliable, vetted legal content increasingly exists behind paywalls, making it harder for some professionals to participate fully in the next wave of legal tech.
The Limits of Open Tools
At the other end of the spectrum, a growing number of free or low-cost AI tools are entering the market. General-purpose platforms like ChatGPT and open legal databases offer exciting possibilities but often fall short when accuracy, currency, or jurisdictional nuance matter most.
For legal professionals who rely on precision and citation-ready research, tools trained on general internet content can miss the mark. Without strong underlying datasets and tailored training, even the most sophisticated models can yield misleading or incomplete results. Please refer to Ko v Lee, 2025 ONSC 2766 for a very public reminder of the cost attached to relying on general-purpose tools for legal research.
Different Starting Points, Shared Challenges
What’s often missing from conversations about legal innovation is the recognition that practitioners are starting from very different places. Many solo lawyers managing client work, administration, and business development on their own, may rely on CanLII, courthouse libraries, or informal networks. Larger firms may have access to in-house knowledge teams, technical infrastructure, and preferred vendor partnerships.
These are different operating models, each with their own strengths. But if AI is to deliver meaningful support across the profession, it needs to account for a range of practice realities, not just those with built-in infrastructure.
Moving Toward Inclusive Innovation
Right now, the atmosphere around legal AI can feel like a race. Firms jockeying to adopt the latest tools, professionals scrambling to keep pace, and vendors rolling out new features in quick succession. But meaningful innovation isn’t just about being first. It’s about building systems that work for everyone.
If AI is to be useful and trusted across the legal community, developers, vendors, and educators need to consider:
Training and resources that meet practitioners where they are, especially those working independently or without access to formal support teams.
Clear guidance on risk and reliability, helping users understand what AI can (and can’t) do, and where human oversight remains essential.
Human support systems: Research consultants, embedded librarians, and freelance professionals that help translate tools into practice-ready insights.
Legal AI holds enormous potential, but its promise can only be realized if it’s accessible, equitable, and grounded in the full range of legal practice in Canada. Innovation that includes everyone isn’t just fair, it’s stronger.