Author: Josh Lee Page 2 of 19

Where is legal technology in Singapore today?

On 27th April 2023

In Law Firms, Lawyers, Legal Innovation, Legal Technology in Singapore

Reading time: 13 minutes

Written by Josh Lee Kok Thong

Introduction

Where is legal technology in Singapore today? For many who have followed the development of the sector here, this question is more than merely factual. At its core, it is a reflection on the past, present and future of Singapore’s legal technology sector, and traces the development of Singapore’s legal technology landscape.

This article explores this evolutionary arc. First, it describes the development of the legal technology industry from 2016 to 2020, which saw significant and growing interest, demand and dynamism in the use of technology in Singapore’s legal industry. Second, it examines what the legal technology sector looks like today, and two key phenomena that have defined this era: the COVID-19 pandemic and growing institutionalisation of the sector. Third, it looks at the implications of the present state of Singapore’s legal technology industry. Fourth, it suggests areas that Singapore’s legal technology sector can explore to infuse greater interest, innovation and investment into the ecosystem.

This article also hopes to highlight the two key groups of players to Singapore’s legal technology landscape: established institutional actors, such as the government and its various agencies, as well as large law firms and legal technology companies; and “ground-up actors”: local legal technology start-ups, informal and/or non-profit bodies set up by legal technology enthusiasts, student groups in law schools, global legal technology movements, and more. Over the course of the article, it is submitted that greater collaboration between both sets of players is encouraged for the success of Singapore’s legal technology ecosystem. For Singapore’s legal technology sector to reach its renaissance, such collaboration needs to be carefully developed and nurtured.

Alexis Chun: All CLAW is LegalTech, but not all LegalTech is CLAW (Part 3 of 3)

By Josh Lee

On 31st January 2023

In Automation, Law Firms, Lawyers, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation

Reading time: 4 minutes

Written by Alexis N. Chun

In the first part of this 3-part series, we spoke about the status quo in law and how we at Legalese and the Computational Law Centre (CCLAW) at Singapore Management University are working together to make Computational Law a reality. Last week, we painted you a picture of what a computational law driven future might look like, and assured you that the approach of building a DSL is a rather well-honed tradition one in software that has transformed professional domains like accounting, architecture, and digital photography. This article is the final part of a 3-part series.

Alexis Chun: What a computational law future might look like (Part 2 of 3)

By Josh Lee

On 6th January 2023

In Automation, Law Firms, Lawyers, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation

Reading time: 5 minutes

Written by Alexis N. Chun

Last week we spoke about the status quo in law and how we at Legalese and the Computational Law Centre (CCLAW) at Singapore Management University are working together to make Computational Law a reality. This is part 2 of this 3-part series.

If you recall, we discussed the (natural) language problem of law and how perhaps a domain-specific language (DSL) for law might be the foundational technological innovation to fix it. Because a DSL gives “Law” (which term we use to collectively refer to statutes, regulations, contracts, guidelines, business process logic, rules, quasi-legal documentation, you name it) a common denominator, the disparate bits can now “talk” to each other. This is what makes “Law” computable and computational. And in our vision, this foundational technology gets us from pseudocode to real code. That’s what we suspect a contract wants to be when it grows up: a program. And the marvellous thing about programs is that Law can graduate from simply expressing syntax (i.e. words on a page, legalistic expressions) that are essentially pseudocode to semantics (i.e. what does it mean in an objective or clearly defined fashion), to pragmatics (i.e. what does it mean for me). Semantics and pragmatics are the traditional demesnes of lawyers; these are things you’d pay and ask for a lawyer’s advice on. But lawyers’ service of semantics and pragmatics may be too much like a priesthood (and too expensive) for most end users: go forth with this blessed document, but don’t break your back carving out the laundry list of assumptions, professional indemnities, and deciphering what exactly it means for you. Take faith. This just might not cut it anymore for the increasingly tech-savvy and knowledge-driven common man on the Clapham omnibus who reviews and background checks everything including their drivers, romantic dates, and restaurants.

Alexis Chun: From LegalTech to Computational Law (Part 1 of 3)

By Josh Lee

On 29th December 2022

In Automation, Law Firms, Lawyers, Legal Hackers, Legal Innovation

Reading time: 5 minutes

Written by Alexis N. Chun

In 2011, Marc Andreessen said “software is eating the world”. And with that in mind, a computer scientist and a lawyer decided to do just that. Legalese.com was born, and 5 years later, Singapore Management University’s Centre for Computational Law.

The Status Quo

Commas alone have cost one million (Canadian) dollars, millions in taxpayers’ dollars, and even gotten someone out of a parking ticket. Richard Susskind OBE has written about The End of Lawyers and the law firm’s business model has been described as “risking obsolescence”, “rigged to fail”, and trapped “in a death spiral”. The Atlantic said the legal profession was “the only job with an industry devoted to helping people quit”. That’s all rather grim, but probably not news. You get it, the status quo sucks.

Cryptocurrency: Liability and Regulatory Issues

By Josh Lee

On 16th October 2022

In Blockchain, Policy, Regulations

Reading time: 15 minutes

Written by Tan Yan Ru | Edited by Josh Lee Kok Thong

We’re all law and tech scholars now, says every law and tech sceptic. That is only half-right. Law and technology is about law, but it is also about technology. This is not obvious in many so-called law and technology pieces which tend to focus exclusively on the law. No doubt this draws on what Judge Easterbrook famously said about three decades ago, to paraphrase: “lawyers will never fully understand tech so we might as well not try”.

In open defiance of this narrative, LawTech.Asia is proud to announce a collaboration with the Singapore Management University Yong Pung How School of Law’s LAW4032 Law and Technology class. This collaborative special series is a collection featuring selected essays from students of the class. Ranging across a broad range of technology law and policy topics, the collaboration is aimed at encouraging law students to think about where the law is and what it should be vis-a-vis technology.

This piece, written by Tan Yan Ru, seeks to explore liability and regulatory issues around cryptocurrency. It begins by exploring how the two central characteristics of blockchain – decentralisation and pseudonymity raise liability and regulatory issues. It then examines existing measures taken by regulators and policymakers to address liability issues, while acknowledging increasing sophistication on the part of those seeking to evade these measures. Other measures, such as raising cryptocurrency literacy and setting up a cryptocurrency task force are examined. Moving on, it examines the existing regulatory conundrum arising from the use of cryptocurrencies. It is observed that current regulatory regimes appear to reflect an escalating legal arms race to be the first in coming up with a solution. Finally, the paper submits that regulatory issues may be resolved by the harmonisation of the various regulations with international institutions working together.