It’s 2025, and clients are using AI tools like ChatGPT in their legal matters. If you’re an HR professional or run a business, maybe you’ve seen a team member pull up ChatGPT to write a demand letter or question your workplace policies. Or maybe you’ve tried it yourself: “Can I fire someone for this?” or “Is this harassment under Ontario law?”
These tools aren’t going away. Just like WebMD changed how patients interact with doctors, ChatGPT is shifting the lawyer-client relationship. That can be a good thing, with the right boundaries.
Link to The WebMD Effect The WebMD Effect
WebMD gave patients a sense of control and helped them prepare for appointments, even if it sometimes led to incorrect self-diagnoses and nurtured some hypochondria. Doctors learned to engage with the platform, not ignore it.
Same goes for law. ChatGPT can help you research, get oriented, and ask better questions. But it doesn’t know your employment contracts, your culture, your team’s history, or your jurisdiction. That’s where things can go sideways.
Link to The Legal Version of “It’s Probably Just a Cold” The Legal Version of “It’s Probably Just a Cold”
We’ve seen clients use ChatGPT to:
- Write settlement responses during active negotiations.
- Draft employment contracts using templates from other provinces or countries.
- Calculate severance using generic formulas that don’t apply to their facts.
This is the legal version of “it’s just a cold.” It might be fine, but it could also lead to waived rights, escalated disputes, or a completely avoidable lawsuit.
Link to ChatGPT Isn’t a Lawyer – It’s a Brainstorming Tool ChatGPT Isn’t a Lawyer – It’s a Brainstorming Tool
We’re glad people are more curious and engaged. But AI should support strategy, not replace it. A few common risks:
- Jurisdiction confusion: U.S. law or outdated Ontario info.
- No context: It can’t assess if workplace conduct meets the threshold for harassment.
- Privacy risk: Typing your scenario into a public chatbot may waive privilege.
- Confidently wrong: ChatGPT often sounds convincing, even when it’s dead wrong.
Link to How We Use AI at SpringLaw How We Use AI at SpringLaw
We use AI tools for research, brainstorming, reviewing large files, and litigation prep. But we don’t let it run the show.
If your employee used ChatGPT to draft something, no problem, just don’t send it out without a legal check. We’ll scan it, flag any risks, and incorporate what’s helpful. AI is great for sparking ideas. We make sure those ideas hold up.
Link to Client Engagement is a Win Client Engagement is a Win
We want clients involved. When you engage, ask questions, or explore options with AI, we’re all for it. But you still need a legal strategy, and that’s where we come in to guide, not just correct.
Link to HR Heads-Up HR Heads-Up
- Don’t draft contracts, workplace policies, or legal responses with ChatGPT without review.
- Ask staff to disclose AI use in any document going to legal.
- Never copy-paste AI content into a negotiation without a legal check.
Link to Close Doesn’t Count in Law Close Doesn’t Count in Law
Sometimes ChatGPT gets it right. But in law, “close” can still cost you. A severance issue might turn on a single word. A claim might hinge on facts AI can’t assess. A good legal argument falls apart in the wrong forum or with U.S. caselaw.
The risks aren’t theoretical. You don’t want to be the employer who “almost” followed the law and now faces a wrongful dismissal claim. Or the employee who missed a limitation period because AI didn’t know Ontario rules.
Link to Final Word Final Word
Use AI to start the conversation, not to finish it. If your team is getting ahead of your legal strategy, or trying to out-lawyer your lawyer with ChatGPT, let’s talk. We’ll help you set smart boundaries and stay ahead of the curve.