A year ago, working with AI was still something for tech enthusiasts — and a reason for everyone else to smile. Then it crept into everyday life so quickly that today it is hard to imagine without it. As ordinary as a web search engine.
In our field, legal tech, it is contested. And yet more and more lawyers and judges use AI. A lawyer without AI stands little chance against a lawyer with AI. Courts are flooded with AI-generated briefs — and often the only way for the judge to cope with the deluge of text is to use AI in turn.
The result: one lawyer writes with AI against the other lawyer with AI, and the judge evaluates with AI support. Half in jest, I sometimes say: why don't we just ask the AI who wins?
The decision must stay with the human
That is exactly where the danger lies — and the challenge for the future. The EU AI Act mandates the “human in the loop”. And that — for all the legitimate criticism of EU regulation — is a good thing. The decision must stay with the human.
At CEAVEO, this principle is not bolted on afterwards but part of the architecture: human review is firmly built into every AI workflow. Every AI output is a draft — reviewed and taken responsibility for by a human.
A tool for the Mittelstand
With CEAVEO LEGALinhouse, we put exactly that into the hands of small and medium-sized enterprises: AI support for their own legal department — within a legal and a human framework. So that the Mittelstand can operate on equal footing with large corporations and public authorities.
Your legal department — digitalized.
An opinion piece by CEAVEO · As of July 2026