Written by Yiap Siew Fong | Edited by Josh Lee Kok Thong
May 2024 was a particularly eventful month for legal technology in Hong Kong. It marked the return of the FT Innovative Lawyers Asia-Pacific Awards (“FT Awards”) to Hong Kong, showcasing the latest achievements in legal innovation throughout the region. The Hong Kong chapter of Asia-Pacific Legal Innovation and Technology Association (“ALITA”) also hosted a digital innovation roundtable in collaboration with the Law, Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship Lab at the University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law (“LITE Lab@HKU”). Earlier that month, a panel session at Hong Kong Mediation Week titled “Bots v Humans? The Future of Mediation” examined the implications and potential of AI in relation to the field of dispute resolution and mediation. These recent events provide an opportune context to examine the current state of the legal technology landscape in Hong Kong.
Overview of the legal technology scene
The legal technology scene in Hong Kong is characterised by a diverse composition of private sector players. These include law firms, in-house legal departments, legal technology providers and technology startups, all of which have been at the forefront of creating and deploying innovative legal technology solutions tailored to the market. Major international law firms have brought technology and know-how from other markets, implementing innovative solutions internally. Meanwhile, local law firms and startups leverage their agility, adaptability, and deep knowledge of the local landscape to develop niche legal technology offerings. Further, global technology service providers contribute their expertise and experience in delivering advanced technological solutions to the legal industry. Finally, in-house legal departments drive legal technology adoption within their organisations and their external counsel as they seek to improve the delivery of legal services.
To complement private sector efforts, the governmental and professional bodies have been actively encouraging further legal technology adoption through initiatives and policies, which will be explored in greater detail later in this article.
Another group of players worth highlighting is academic institutions. A notable example is LITE Lab@HKU,which was founded in 2019 as an interdisciplinary and experiential programme where students learn and apply innovative technology and methodology. Students in the programme co-design lawtech and regtech projects with real-world partners such as not-for-profit organizations, legal industry participants and the wider innovation ecosystem in accelerating their innovation efforts. LITE Lab@HKU students have won global competitions such as Georgetown University’s Iron Tech Lawyer Invitational, and have even spun-off legal technology startups. Another recent development in the legal education sector has been the Centre for Legal Innovation & Digital Society (“CLINDS”) which was instituted in May 2022 by the Chinese University of Hong Kong’s (“CUHK”) Faculty of Law with a mission of promoting first-class research in law and technology. CLINDS was formerly known as the Centre for Financial Regulation and Economic Development and the shift in direction reflects the increasing attention being paid to how law and technology interact locally and in the wider region.
According to a Tech Baseline Assessment performed by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority in June 2022, the adoption rate of legal technology was expected to double to around by 2025. However that figure only pertains to banking institutions, reflecting the increasingly regulated industry which they are operating in. While the current size of the overall legal technology market in Hong Kong is challenging to measure precisely, legal technology is used in a range of legal work, including legal research, document review and drafting, contract management, e-discovery, case management and regulatory compliance. Legal technologies are also used in the operational aspects of running a law firm or legal department (commonly known as legal operations). These technologies include practice management tools, matter management systems, e-billing platforms and data analytic solutions.
Trends in adoption of legal technology
Pre-COVID era
In the pre-COVID era, Hong Kong law firms’ operations were characterised by a substantial dependence on conventional communication channels (such as email and phone), in-person interactions and paper-based workflows. Nevertheless, there was a burgeoning interest surrounding legal technology. This indicated a growing awareness amongst Hong Kong legal practitioners of technology’s impact on traditional legal practices.
In 2019, the Hong Kong Law Society (the professional body representing solicitors in Hong Kong) conducted the “Innovation Value Chain Survey” to assess the innovation priorities of its members. The insights from the survey provided valuable information regarding the focus areas and priorities within the legal community regarding innovation and technology adoption. According to the survey, legal research tools emerged as the most popular technology product then adopted by private practitioners, followed by document management and accounting/billing solutions. The study predicted that these adoption trends would continue in the next 12 months. The study also identified the following key drivers for innovation: (a) productivity and operational efficiency, (b) work quality, (c) risk management, and (d) cost control. For in-house respondents, the study revealed a preference for products focused on document management, document review and e-signing. Similar to private practitioners, the primary driver for innovation in this context was the pursuit of enhanced productivity and operational efficiency. Additionally, in-house legal teams prioritised gaining a competitive edge, improving work quality, controlling costs, and facilitating effective team coordination. The study also predicted that the following 12 months would see increased adoption in tools for team coordination and workflow management.
Post-COVID era
In absence of a similar survey in recent times, a number of active participants in the Hong Kong legal technology ecosystem were interviewed for their insights into local adoption trends since the pandemic. According to Jonathan Voo, Senior Manager of Innovation – Asia at Mayer Brown, the pandemic necessitated a swift migration towards comprehensive remote technologies, which are now used extensively for client consultations, hearing and court proceedings. He adds that it also ushered in the adoption of client portals and online collaboration platforms which offer more dynamic interactions with clients, enhanced document sharing, real-time case updates, and efficient billing processes, significantly enhancing client satisfaction and engagement.
Nicholas Cook, Partner and AI & Tech Driver at Tiang & Partners (a PwC network firm), notes that previous practices of exchanging wet-ink documents and maintaining hardcopy company secretarial records also changed rapidly during the pandemic as the need for digital execution of documents became critical. The shift towards use of platforms like DocuSign for document execution became more common to allow for secure and verifiable digital signatures and ultimately enable legal processes to continue uninterrupted despite the inability to meet in person. Cook points to legislative amendments to the Companies Ordinance to better allow for virtual meetings, reflecting the need for corporate governance to adapt to the realities of remote interaction. Similarly, company secretaries have also started moving towards more widespread adoption of electronic record keeping. He adds that in late 2023, the Companies Registry also launched an overhaul of the Integrated Companies Registry Information System (“ICRIS”) which was replaced by a brand new and much enhanced e-Services Portal, similar to ACRA’s BizFile+ in Singapore.
Another adoption trend that also emerged recently is the development of custom document automation solutions for specific practices and workflows, allowing for the automation of repetitive tasks and streamlining of processes. For example, one law firm introduced an automated onboarding tool for complex capital market transactions that require the coordination of multiple parties’ details. The tool allows clients to confirm their details via a streamlined platform, and the law firm’s deal team to review and update the information to ensure ongoing accuracy in future deals. Enhanced data management through the tool has reduced errors and delays that were previously associated with traditional email-based data collection, significantly improving the firm’s operational efficiency in managing complex transactions.
While the pandemic accelerated the use of technology to support remote work, it could be argued that the key demarcation line was the increased accessibility to Large Language Models, specifically the launch of ChatGPT. Unsurprisingly, the widespread global attention given to the transformative potential of generative AI technology has also extended to the legal sector in Hong Kong. Danny Kan, Partner at Stephenson Harwood and Adjunct Assistant Professor at CUHK, observes that as the use of ChatGPT gained momentum, law firms became more proactive in their exploration and evaluation of legal technology products (which incorporate an AI element) to transform conventional legal workflows, such as document review and analysis, drafting (and re-drafting) and legal research. Many vendors have also started integrating generative AI capabilities into existing tools, leading to even stronger interest in legal technology generally. Jacob Sin, formerly ODR Director at eBRAM International Online Dispute Resolution Centre and commenting in his personal capacity, notes that most of the legal technology products incorporating generative AI try to distinguish themselves from the application of generative AI in other fields by limiting the scope of data available to the generative AI and emphasising the visibility of citations and explainability of a generated response. This approach serves to mitigate the risks of hallucination and improve verifiability.
Increased adoption of AI in the legal industry
The adoption of AI within law firms in Hong Kong varies with many still in the experimental phrase, while some are proactively making efforts to stay at the forefront of technological progress. “Initially our exploration into AI was tentative, largely confined to basic document review and legal research within larger firms,” says Voo (Mayer Brown). “Post-pandemic, we’ve accelerated our AI initiatives expanding into predictive analytics, contract analysis, and legal decision-making support systems.”
The accompanying report to the FT Awards found that for one law firm’s Hong Kong office, their use of Harvey AI tangibly reduced the time required for summarising local case law, improved due diligence processes and enhanced Chinese to English translations. There is also a distinct trend among law firms of developing their own proprietary in-house AI assistants. For instance, the law firm winner of the digital solutions category at the FT Awards showcased a generative AI-powered bot which tracks and summarizes press releases issued by Hong Kong regulators. The output is then converted into interactive graphs and trends for use with clients.
Kan (Stephenson Harwood and CUHK) says that besides unveiling a strategic partnership with Harvey AI, his firm has also started working with a partner to build custom generative AI technology solutions, and is selectively identifying existing technology products to enhance the delivery of services to clients. He adds: “We have utilised AI for a number of years to help with an array of work ranging from from title review work in real estate matters, to document disclosure and due diligence work for M&A transactions. Combining this experience with our ambitious generative AI strategy, and supported by our dedicated legal technology team, we are well positioned to investigate and apply the continuously evolving use cases for generative AI.”
Cook (Tiang & Partners) describes how his firm uses a combination of Harvey AI and ChatPwC – the former uses a domain specific version of GPT for legal and legal adjacent work, and the latter is a conversational implementation of GPT-4o deployed globally within the PwC network. “These tools allow us to work more effectively, particularly in the context of providing advice, summarisation, translation and ideation,” he says. “Our wider network is also very focused on emerging Mainland China domestically-developed AI models that meet local regulatory requirements on training and transparency, given the cross-border nature of business in Greater China.” Alongside AI, Sebastian Ko, General Counsel at DFX Labs, says “Blockchain and smart contracts are also being explored for applications such as cross-border transactions and intellectual property management.”
Stephanie Siu, Strategic Legal Solutions Manager, APAC at Thomson Reuters notes that some law firms have utilized AI technology in creative ways for generating new business and increasing client engagement. She gives an example of one law firm harnessing AI for quick and cost-effective preliminary due diligence in order to win the engagement for the full due diligence. Another law firm conducted interactive Midjourney sessions with clients to create digital art and discuss legal issues round the technology being used. As law firms familiarise themselves with leveraging generative AI for their own legal processes, it becomes logical to extend their expertise to support clients in adopting AI for their own organisational purposes. Cook (Tiang & Partners) shares that some of his firm’s clients have run their own genAI pilots, using technologies like Microsoft Azure OpenAi. “Examples of frequently asked questions relate to how to select and make best use of AI, internal upskilling program requirements, and suggested approaches for governance, security, confidentiality and adoption,” he says.
Trends in in-house legal departments
For in-house legal departments, there continues to be a significant need for innovative technologies to streamline legal processes and enhance efficiency. “In the post-pandemic era, many legal teams are now supported by technical and operations teams that are experienced in legal process workflows. This has further empowered in-house lawyers to adopt more advanced automations”, says Ko (DFX Labs). This trend is reflected by the FT Awards where Hong Kong-based companies AS Watson and Klook received commendations for their digital solutions. Both companies’ in-house legal teams adopted contract management systems which demonstrated efficiency and productivity gains. In AS Watson’s case, the new system reduced contract review times by up to 50 per cent while the Klook legal team were able to use their system to handle double the volume of contracts with the same number of lawyers. There is also a growing tendency for companies to investing in legal spend analysis and management software to manage external counsel spend, particularly in sectors where there is expected to be increased regulatory and dispute risks.
According to Brian Tang, founding executive director of LITE Lab@HKU, in-house counsel are keen to explore ways to use no/low code solutions that are easily maintained to assist with a wide range of use cases. These use cases range from “legal front doors” for self-help and triage, to contract review and approval processes and document automation including for letter and contract generation. He provides the example of LITE Lab@HKU’s Lawtech & Regtech Sandbox which involves law students collaborating with the legal and operations departments of corporate partners to co-design proof of concepts for real-world painpoints with the use of no/low code tools. The initiative received a Legal Innovation in Operations Projects Award from the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium in 2022 and some of the prototypes have since been put into practice. More recently, LITE Lab@HKU received an Edtech Hero Award. It also extended its pedagogy for teach law students to training of legal departments on generative AI. For instance, Tang has conducted training for over 70 inhouse counsels from across Jardine Matheson’s diverse businesses across the Asia-Pacific region.
Industry and regulatory support
During the pandemic, technology was relied upon to ensure continuity and enhance the resilience of the legal industry. To that end, public authorities in Hong Kong launched new initiatives to support legal practitioners in embracing technology.
As part of the second round of Anti-epidemic Fund measures in April 2020, the Hong Kong Government announced the establishment of the Covid-19 Online Dispute Resolution Scheme (the “ODR Scheme”). The ODR Scheme was set up in anticipation of a wave in disputes relating to the pandemic and aimed to facilitate a more efficient and cost-effective way to resolve disputes while accommodating social distancing guidelines. As the ODR Scheme covered pandemic-related disputes where the amount claimed was HK$500,000, the main beneficiaries were expected to be micro, small and medium-sized enterprises, with an estimated 2,000 cases budgeted for in the first year of the Scheme’s operation. Through the use of a platform provided by the eBRAM International Online Dispute Resolution Centre (“eBRAM”), parties were able conduct online negotiation, mediation and arbitration meetings and hearings. Besides text-based communication and video-conferencing technology, the platform featured identity authentication, AI machine translation, e-signing and document management systems. Given that the ODR Scheme ended in September 2023, it would be interesting to see statistics to gauge its overall impact such as volume of cases, settlements, processing time, claim amounts and arbitrators and mediators who have provided services under the scheme.
Under the same round of measures, the HK$40 million LawTech Fund was launched to facilitate technology adoption by small and medium-sized law firms and barristers chambers. The target recipients were estimated to represent a sizeable proportion of Hong Kong legal market – more than 60 per cent of law firms and more than 50 per cent of barristers’ chambers in Hong Kong. Under the scheme, each eligible law firm and chambers were entitled to reimbursement of up to HK$50,000 for amounts spent on procuring or upgrading technology systems and legal technology training for employees. According to a government press release, over 500 applications were received, representing 70% of all eligible law firms and chambers.
Remaining funds of about HK$15.7 million from the LawTech Fund were then allocated towards another legal technology initiative, the Hong Kong Legal Cloud Fund. Introduced in 2022, the fund is administered by the Asian Academy of International Law on a pro bono basis. It provides local legal and dispute resolution professionals with free subscriptions to Hong Kong Legal Cloud services for up to three years. The Hong Kong Legal Cloud was developed by eBRAM and is an online platform which employs AI, blockchain and cloud technologies to provide secure and affordable data storage and other cloud-based services such as document exchange, legal research and machine translation services for the Hong Kong legal industry.
In addition, the Law Society of Hong Kong has been supporting members to enhance their technology competencies even prior to the pandemic. Its Innotech Committee (renamed from the Technology Committee in 2017) has been working to identify technology-based needs and challenges within the Hong Kong legal community. It has also provided assistance through strategies and resources. One initiative driven by the Innotech Committee is a Global Acceleration Academy Programme, which was established in partnership with the Hong Kong Science and Technology Parks Corporation (“HKSTP”) to source start-ups that can develop legal solutions. Further, having been paying close attention to AI developments, the Law Society published a Position Paper on the Impact of Artificial Intelligence on the Legal Profession earlier this year. The Position Paper provides an overview of how AI technology would potentially affect law firm operations and the administration of justice. In addition it contains recommendations for responsible adoption of AI technology and enhancement of legal education. As the first paper of its kind for the Hong Kong legal profession, it is an important step forward in spurring proactive and coordinated efforts to address the risks and leverage the benefits of AI. Anecdotally, the release of the Position Paper has also spurred increased enquiries from lawyers to legal technology providers about how to incorporate legal technology into their workflows. It will also be interesting to see the results of the “AI Transformation in Legal Practice Survey” which the Law Society has been conducting among its members during July and August 2024.
Voo (Mayer Brown) observes that 2024 has seen proactive movements towards establishing a structured regulatory framework for AI, with Hong Kong observing regulatory trends in major regions like the EU and China to potentially model its AI governance strategies accordingly. In August 2023, the Hong Kong Office of the Government Chief Information Officer issued an Ethical Artificial Intelligence Framework intended to assist departments in planning, designing and implementing AI and big data analytics in accordance with responsible AI principles. This has since been followed by the Hong Kong Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data issuing an Artificial Intelligence: Model Personal Data Protection Framework in June 2024, which offers recommendations and best practices for organisations that procure, implement and use AI systems. At the time of writing this article, the Hong Kong judiciary had just recently published its Guidelines on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Judges and Judicial Officers and Support Staff of the Hong Kong Judiciarywhich covers general principles of use of technology in courts and guiding principles on responsible use on generative AI in the course of judicial and administrative work.
Recognising and resolving gaps
Overabundance vs relevance
The proliferation of legal technology solutions, although providing a wealth of options to legal practitioners, has led to a crowded landscape. Today, there are a myriad of specialised tools, each designed to address specific aspects of legal operations. As a result, legal teams often grapple with the complexity of managing multiple tools for specific workflows. For example, the different stages of contract management may require dealing with template generators, contract review technologies and DocuSign, among others. Further, there is a disconnect between the available tools and the specific needs of legal teams, particularly where an organisation has invested in outdated or underutilised technologies. Legal professionals may end up lacking the appropriate tools for their roles, leading to low adoption rates in legal technology. These issues could be addressed through the development of more comprehensive platforms that consolidate multiple functions rather than singular tools, which would reduce complexity and enhance overall efficiency. There is also a need for intuitive and easy-to-use solutions that require minimal training, allowing legal professionals to quickly adapt and leverage the technology to its fullest potential. “For instance, an AI-enhanced contract review tool that simplifies the review process to merely sending an email could markedly improve usability and efficiency,” says Voo (Mayer Brown).
Interoperability and data flow challenges
For users of legal technology, the true power of innovation lies in the ability to leverage interconnected data, enabling comprehensive insights, automation and enhanced decision-making. However, the availability of data within the legal industry is often more limited and siloed compared to other sectors. Sin explains that this is primarily due to the necessity of complying with requirements relating to confidentiality and privacy as well as restrictions on data storage and transfer across jurisdictions. “The convenience and efficiency of legal technology is negated when data needs to be manually ported from technology to technology,” he says. “In light of this, the legal and tech industry may need to work together to build official infrastructure that supports the free but still safe flow of data, such as common secure data storage which has privacy, encryption, redundancy and access standards that meet the expected requirements for dealing with legal information.”
Ko (DFX Labs) similarly points to the challenges of lack of interoperability and data standardisation among different legal technology solutions which pose difficulties in integrating various systems and creating a cohesive ecosystem. He adds: “Barriers include the fragmented nature of the legal industry, legacy IT infrastructure, and the need for stronger data protection, governance and security protocols.”
Recent proposals for easing data export restrictions by the Cyberspace Administration of China and the introduction of the Greater Bay Area Standard Contract are considered to be helpful in facilitating smoother data transfers. “These developments are expected to simplify compliance burdens and promote economic activities by making personal data transfers more straightforward and less restrictive, thus supporting Hong Kong’s status as a regional economic powerhouse,” says Voo (Mayer Brown).
There is also the additional consideration of what should be the optimal deployment model for legal technology solutions. Ryan Purkey, Managing Consultant at Lexitech Consulting, notes that prior to COVID-19, law firms were still considering local and SaaS solutions on a similar footing while comparing feature sets. “Cloud-based solutions are now the primary if not de facto winners for a remote-ready workforce. However AI certainly has a more secure use case by being on-site,” he says. “If the tech ecosystem can better address these two competing use cases in a happy middle ground, they will have a large clientele of grateful lawyers.”
Improving remote collaboration
While remote collaboration has rapidly gained traction in Hong Kong since the pandemic, some legal professionals point to persistent challenges on two fronts. First, they observe that many flexible communication tools adopted by law firms in Hong Kong lack integration with other prominent platforms in the Greater Bay Area (such as Voov, DingTalk and Lark). As a result, there is a real need to integrate the diverse platforms to facilitate smoother operations and improve service for clients in the GBA and wider mainland China market.
Second, despite the existence of mature platforms such as Docusign and legislation in the form of the Electronic Transactions Ordinance, some lawyers note that electronic signing of deeds is an area where Hong Kong lags behind other jurisdictions. They cite the need for clearer regulatory guidance to increase certainty, especially since there is minimal Hong Kong case law regarding the enforceability of e-signatures in court. Widespread adoption has been further hindered by financial institutions in Hong Kong generally not accepting e-signed deeds as well as traditional preferences and concerns regarding authenticity and identification.
Managing expectations and overcoming conservatism
Siu (Thomson Reuters) observes that there has been a significant shift in attitude towards legal technology over the past 4 years. “Lawyers are much keener to have an explorative or initial conversation about incorporating technology into their workflow.” However a common challenge arises when users underestimate the preparation work that is required before reaping the full benefits of legal technology. Siu gives an example of using generative AI tools, where data needs to be gathered, digitised and processed for the finetuning of these tools before they can be used effectively in specific use cases. “There is also a learning period before you know how to best interact with the AI,” she says. “People often underestimate this part – for AI to work well for you, you’ll need to put in hard work beforehand.” Similarly, for process improvement tools such as contract lifecycle management, there is often significant planning and time that needs to be invested before actual deployment.
In May and June 2024, LexisNexis surveyed over 200 legal professionals in Hong Kong on their experiences and perspectives regarding generative AI. The resulting Generative AI and the Hong Kong Legal Profession survey found that the majority of respondents had adopted generative AI tools in their work (53%) and were confident in their understanding of these tools (64%). Almost half of the respondents (41%) also regarded generative AI technology as having a transformative or significant impact on routine legal tasks. However there was generally lower confidence in the current abilities of the generative AI tools, with 44% of respondents being skeptical about the accuracy of research and quality of the first drafts generated. These results suggest that users may also need to shift their expectations when working with AI-powered solutions rather than simply perceiving AI as a magic bullet. While AI technologies may not achieve 100% accuracy in all situations, users should not be discouraged from utilising their potential and should view AI as a powerful tool to be leveraged. “It is important to always remember, at least in the immediate future, humans will always need to be in the loop, and the conversation should be framed as human vs human + AI rather than human vs AI,” advises Siu.
Hoi Tak Leung, Counsel at Ashurst and Asia lead for Ashurst Advance observes that Hong Kong’s adoption rate for legal technology remains a step behind Australia, Europe and the US. “This is reflected in metrics, such as the number of people in metrics such as the number of people employed in related positions, and the maturity of conversations with clients and within clients internally,” he says. “But there has been a notable uptick in awareness and adoption in recent years and I’m confident that adoption will continue to increase.” Other market observers suggest that there still remains a deep-rooted cultural inertia towards adopting legal technology. For a mature and well-structured legal sector such as Hong Kong, there may not be a pressing need to depart from the tried-and-tested methods that have served the legal profession adequately thus far. Risk mitigation may also play a role in influencing the pace of legal technology adoption. For instance under the Hong Kong Solicitors’ Guide to Professional Conduct issued by the Law Society of Hong Kong, solicitors have the responsibility of ensuring that their use of information communication technology aligns with professional guidelines and directions and applicable law. As a result, legal professionals may prioritize mitigating risks associated with new technologies. Purkey (Lexitech Consulting) recommends that legal practitioners take note of the principle of privacy-by-design referred to in the PCPD’s Artificial Intelligence: Model Personal Data Protection Framework and recognise that the principle is a core tenet of legal work and attorney-client privilege. “If the dominant platforms in the market do not have workflows in place that allow for maintaining those centuries-old standards, that is going to be a difficult problem every time it arises.”
Recognising these limitations, the focus should shift towards comprehensive risk management strategies that enhance security, privacy and compliance while maximizing the benefits of legal technology. It is also important to acknowledge that eliminating all risks may be impractical or uneconomical from a technical standpoint. Purkey observes some promising developments in the startup scene: “Businesses are beginning to spring up that are seeking to combine legal usage and AI in ways that avoid the pitfalls of data ingestion and processing, or do so in a way that only runs data through compute cycles and not training, leaving data off external systems.” Several of these startups are founded by teams that combine technologists and lawyers to deliver usable tools that take attorney-client confidentiality into account.
Further, as client expectations evolve, law firms may be increasingly driven to embrace legal technology to remain competitive. In particular, clients are becoming more aware of the benefits of legal technology and may expect law firms to demonstrate how they are using technology to be more efficient, cost-effective and generally enhance service delivery. “Some clients in Western countries have added ‘adoption of legal technology’ in their scorecards when admitting law firms to the legal panels,” says Kan (Stephenson Harwood and CUHK). “They ask clients to go beyond verbal commitments to use legal technology and want to see real impact of legal technology on matters. This is a good way to encourage law firms to adopt (or at least think about adopting, if they haven’t already) legal technology into their practice.”
Improving access to justice
Legal technology can be play an important role in improving access to justice in Hong Kong. Voo (Mayer Brown) explains that there are a number of factors that contribute to the problem of unequal access to justice including the high costs and limited accessibility of legal services (especially for those with lower incomes), difficulty of navigating the legal system and lack of public legal education.
Online legal platforms have the potential to incorporate a range of user-friendly features such as up-to-date legal information, interactive education, language assistance, chatbots and self-help tools. This improved accessibility to resources can empower members of the public to increase their legal literacy and navigate the legal system more effectively, regardless of their background. The use of virtual legal consultations eliminates geographical barriers and allows individuals to seek legal advice remotely, particularly in underserved areas or for those who face mobility challenges.
Legal technology can also support community organisations, non-profit groups and social justice initiatives in making their operations more accessible and efficient to the public. Implementing tools that improve efficiency and productivity such as digital case management systems and document automation results in individuals receiving quicker access to legal services. Data analytics and predictive tools enable legal professionals such as pro bono lawyers and legal aid service providers to make informed decisions.
Building out the ecosystem
The success of any ecosystem lies in its ability to forge meaningful connections among its constituents. The Hong Kong chapter of ALITA has created a foundation for continuous learning through regular separate in-person roundtables among law firms and in-house legal departments. These roundtables have allowed legal practitioners to exchange insights, share best practices and showcase innovative legal technology solutions.
The positive momentum generated by such gatherings raises the question on how to further build upon them and further cultivate a vibrant legal technology ecosystem in Hong Kong. “More community events such as a local legal technology festival or CLOC chapter, where legal technology and legal issues around technology can be discussed would be helpful to foster a more connected ecosystem in Hong Kong,” suggests Siu (Thomson Reuters).
There is merit in considering the hosting of an annual legal technology-focused conference in Hong Kong, similar to Singapore’s TechLaw.Fest. It could serve as a significant platform for fostering collaboration among legal and technology professionals, policymakers and industry stakeholders and ultimately position Hong Kong as a regional hub for legal innovation. Additionally, organising more locally-run legal hackathons could promote more innovation within the legal sector. Through these events, Hong Kong can tap into the multidisciplinary expertise of its diverse talent pool to explore novel approaches and rapidly prototype innovative legal technology solutions.
At the 2023 ALITA Awards, Hong Kong-based entries accounted for 4 out of the 18 finalists across the Outstanding Legal Innovation & Tech for Good, Outstanding Legal Innovator (Law Firm) and Outstanding Legal Innovator (Inhouse & Ops) categories. These achievements highlight the quality of the legal technology solutions being developed locally and Hong Kong’s ability to compete on a regional scale. Nonetheless, there is still room for growth in terms of scaling up and expanding homegrown legal technology players. In Asia Law Portal’s list of 55 legal tech companies in the Asia-Pacific to follow in 2023, six of the named companies had a presence in Hong Kong (with a further two in Mainland China) compared to 11 in Singapore and 12 in India.
Developing more legal technology businesses in Hong Kong could be facilitated through the establishment of specialised incubators or accelerators that provide support, industry-specific mentorship and resources tailored to the unique challenges of the legal sector. Such an arrangement could involve collaboration between law firms and existing tech hubs like Cyberport and Hong Kong Science and Technology Park. Law firms can assist startups in validating and refining their solutions for the legal market while tech hubs can provide access to infrastructure, cross-industry resources and funding opportunities that can support growth and scalability.
The way forward
Hong Kong possesses many of the key elements to foster a dynamic legal technology landscape and there are promising indications that it is starting to develop in that direction. Local legal institutions are actively considering how best to adapt to the new paradigm and have already begun to focus on making use of AI and emerging technologies in a way that is fair, transparent and accountable. For law school students, there have been an increasing number of opportunities to learn about the intersection of technology and the law and gain hands-on experience with legal technology applications.
Legal professionals are also becoming more engaged in exploring innovative ways to upgrade their legal operations. To drive further adoption, they should be provided with support to evaluate the wide array of options on offer and mitigate potential risks. This can be accomplished through continuous education such as CPD programs centred on technology-focused topics and training, as well as the development of industry-standard risk frameworks, protocols and guidelines.
Within the legal community, larger international and regional law firms have the ability to leverage advanced legal technology solutions and digital innovations that are developed across their platforms. However, over 80% of the approximately 920 Hong Kong law firms registered with the Law Society of Hong Kong are firms with 1-5 partners. Together with the legal departments of Hong Kong-based SMEs, they represent a potentially underserved market that is in need of cost-effective and localised legal technology tools. This provides a significant opportunity for law firms and legal departments to partner with technology companies to create practical legal technology solutions that are tailored for the local market. The use of tax incentives, grants or subsidies could also encourage legal professionals to invest in legal technology tools and training, and promote funding in homegrown legal technology startups and projects.
A suggested blueprint for the way forward would focus on greater adoption, a conducive regulatory framework, talent development, strategic partnerships and funding for impactful projects. It is evident that each of the public, private and academic sectors have a pivotal role to play in nurturing a vibrant legal technology ecosystem in Hong Kong. These tripartite efforts are most effectively conducted in collaboration rather than independently as the issues that affect future progress are multi-faceted and require holistic attention. Hong Kong’s position as a unique gateway between multiple markets further presents a natural opportunity to extend into cross-border collaborations. The future evolution of Hong Kong’s legal technology ecosystem is certainly worth following closely to determine whether it can realise its potential and emerge as a hub for legal innovation and technology on a global stage.
About the author and acknowledgements: Siew Fong Y. is a legal marketing and development professional based in Hong Kong.
LawTech.Asia would like to recognise the valuable contributions made by the following individuals to the article. Please note that any opinions, findings and perspectives expressed above are those of the author and contributors in their personal capacity, and do not reflect the view of any organisation(s) they are affiliated with.
Article contributors:
- Brian Tang, founding executive director of the Law, Innovation, Technology and Entrepreneurship Lab at the University of Hong Kong’s Faculty of Law (LITE Lab@HKU); Co-Chairperson, Asia-Pacific Legal Innovation and Technology Association (ALITA)
- Carl Li, Lead Innovation Lawyer – Asia at Linklaters
- Danny Kan, Partner and Stephenson Harwood and Adjunct Assistant Professor at The Chinese University of Hong Kong
- Hoi Tak Leung, Counsel at Ashurst and Asia lead for Ashurst Advance
- Jacob Sin, formerly ODR Director at eBRAM International Online Dispute Resolution Centre
- Jonathan Voo, Senior Manager of Innovation – Asia at Mayer Brown
- Nicholas Cook, Partner and AI & Tech Driver at Tiang & Partners (a PwC network firm)
- Ryan Purkey, Managing Consultant at Lexitech Consulting
- Sebastian Ko, General Counsel at DFX Labs
- Stephanie Siu, Strategic Legal Solutions Manager, APAC at Thomson Reuters