ChatGPT for Legal Consultations: Myths vs. Reality

Myth 1: Neural Networks Will Replace Lawyers

Reality : ChatGPT and similar models are advanced text generators, not legal experts. They:

  • Make mistakes in interpreting laws, especially in complex cases.
  • Cannot distinguish between current and outdated norms (e.g., they may reference repealed articles).
  • Generate "plausible" answers that seem logical but do not align with legal practice.

Example : A neural network suggested a tax optimization scheme to a client without considering recent amendments to the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (NК RF).


The "Black Box" Problem

Neural network models operate as opaque systems:

  1. It’s impossible to trace the reasoning chain — how the AI arrived at its conclusion.
  2. No mechanism for verifying sources — the model generates responses based on associations rather than legal analysis.
  3. Risk of conflicting interests — training data may include incorrect patterns.

Consequences : A lawyer relying on ChatGPT risks giving clients inaccurate advice.


Algorithmic Expert Systems: Precision Over Guesswork

Unlike neural networks, expert systems (ES) based on algorithms:

  • Are built on clear rules defined by lawyers.
  • Allow pooling expertise from multiple specialists.
  • Are easily updated when legislation changes.

How It Works :

  1. Lawyers formalize knowledge (e.g., conditions for terminating a contract).
  2. Algorithms check documents against these rules.
  3. The system provides recommendations with references to laws and precedents.

When to Choose an Algorithmic Approach

1. Template-Based Tasks

  • Drafting standard contracts (rental, supply agreements).
  • Checking documents for compliance with GOST or regulations.

Example : An ES analyzes a construction contract and automatically highlights clauses conflicting with Article 702 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (CC RF).

2. Working with Frequent Legislative Changes

  • Tax calculators accounting for current rates.
  • Verifying reports under the Federal Law “On Accounting.”

Case Study : After the VAT change in 2023, the algorithmic system Botman.one updated invoice templates within one day.

3. Standardizing Processes in Law Firms

  • Automating the preparation of lawsuits.
  • Verifying contractor details via API from the Federal Tax Service (FTS).

Why Algorithms Are More Reliable Than Neural Networks in Law

  • Logic Control : Every rule can be reviewed and modified.
  • Transparency : The system shows which norms it relies on.
  • Security : No risk of "hallucinations" or data leaks like in LLMs.

Botman.one Example :
The platform allows:

  • Creating expert systems without programming.
  • Integrating templates with CRM and electronic signatures.
  • Automatically updating documents when laws change.

How to Choose the Right Tool

  1. For Routine Tasks (contracts, verifying details) — algorithmic expert systems.
  2. For Analyzing Unusual Cases — neural networks only as an auxiliary tool , with mandatory review by a lawyer.

Key Takeaways

  • ChatGPT is useful for generating ideas but not for legal decision-making.
  • Algorithmic systems are the choice for tasks where accuracy and legal compliance are critical.

Examples of Botman.one Usage :

  • Automating contract checks for compliance with Federal Law 44-FZ.
  • Generating personalized lawsuits tailored to regional specifics.
  • Integration with electronic signatures for remote document approval.

Tip : Before implementing AI, test it on low-risk tasks — for example, drafting reminder emails.