In September, the legal AI company Harvey raised $550m at a valuation of $15.5bn. In December 2025 it was valued at $8bn. That is a lot of money betting that the way legal work gets done is about to change.
Closer to home, RollOnFriday reported in July that Gateley was planning redundancies among lawyers and support staff in several offices, with an insider saying the firm had cited investment in AI and IT as one of the reasons.
The obvious question is whether AI will take lawyers' jobs. Here is my answer, as someone whose job is moving lawyers between firms.
It changes what gets paid for
I do not think AI removes the need for lawyers. I do think it changes which parts of the job clients will pay for.
Take a task that used to take ten hours and now takes one. Under the billable hour, the firm just lost nine hours of fees. Under a fixed fee, it just made a lot more margin. So the firms that sort out their pricing will do well, and lawyers who can scope and price work sensibly become more valuable.
Who is most exposed
Most people assume juniors are the most exposed. Some junior work will go, and that is part of why trainee numbers are falling. My less obvious view is that the people who should think hardest are mid level lawyers whose main value is getting volume work done quickly, with little client contact. Speed on routine work is exactly what these tools are good at.
Support roles doing document heavy, repeatable work are exposed too. I will not pretend otherwise.
Who becomes more valuable
- Lawyers with their own client relationships. Clients pay for judgement and trust, and a tool cannot take a client out for lunch.
- Good supervisors, because someone has to check what the tools produce.
- People who understand both the law and the tools, and can show a team how to use them safely.
The other view
There is a fair argument that the valuations are ahead of what the tools do day to day. Buying a licence is easy, getting a whole firm to use it well is a lot slower. The change may be slower and messier than the funding headlines suggest. I think that is probably right in the short term. I still would not want my career to depend on it being right for the next ten years.
If you are a lawyer
Get some client contact, even if it is small to start with. Learn how your firm's tools work and where they go wrong. When you interview elsewhere, ask how AI has changed the way the firm prices its work. The answer tells you a lot about where they are heading.
If you are hiring
Hire for judgement and client skills ahead of pure output. A fast drafter was a great hire five years ago. The tools draft now. The person you want is the one who spots when the draft is wrong.
If you are rethinking what your next hire should look like because of all this, when would you be free for a quick chat next week?
Sources
- Harvey, raises $550m at a $15.5bn valuation
- ABA Journal, Harvey raises $550M
- RollOnFriday, Gateley plans redundancies
Key Takeaways
- AI changes which parts of the job clients pay for, which rewards firms that fix their pricing and lawyers who can scope work.
- Mid level lawyers whose main value is fast routine work are more exposed than most people assume, and so are document heavy support roles.
- Client relationships, good supervision and tool fluency become more valuable, not less.
- The change may be slower and messier than the funding headlines, but it is not a bet a ten year career should depend on.
Discuss this confidentially with our team
About the Author
Chris Brain
Founder, Connect Legal Partners
Chris Brain is the Founder of Connect Legal Partners, working a 2-8 PQE legal recruitment desk across the Midlands from the West Midlands - covering Northants, Leicester, Birmingham and Shropshire. He places experienced solicitors with Legal 500-ranked and Chambers UK-listed firms across six core practice areas.