Imagine a world in 2125 where artificial intelligence has revolutionized daily life—could the law be the key to unlocking even greater innovations and ensuring a brighter future for everyone? That's the ambitious vision driving a groundbreaking initiative at the University of Toronto. But here's where it gets intriguing: Will AI make lawyers obsolete, or will it empower them like never before? Let's dive into this fascinating story that blends philanthropy, technology, and the evolving role of legal expertise.
Dated December 16, 2025, this announcement highlights how University of Toronto alumnus Donald Harrison (who earned his LLB in 1997) is making a transformative donation to support studies on the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and legal technology. This gift will propel forward research into how these cutting-edge tools might reshape both the practice of law and its broader societal implications.
“We’re deeply grateful to Donald Harrison for his forward-thinking dedication in setting up this endowed chair,” remarked University Professor and Dean Jutta Brunnée, who holds the James Marshall Tory Dean’s Chair. “His philanthropy bolsters our status as leaders in exploring the dynamic interplay between law and technology.” In honor of his substantial contribution, the position will be officially titled the Don Harrison Chair in AI and Technology.
For those new to the concept, an endowed chair is a prestigious academic role funded by a permanent endowment—essentially, a donation that generates ongoing income to support research and teaching, ensuring long-term impact without relying on annual budgets. Harrison, who began his legal career at the Toronto firm Davies, Ward, Phillips & Vineberg, made a pivotal move in 2000 to join Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati in Palo Alto, California. There, he first encountered Google and played a crucial role in taking the company public, before becoming a full-time employee in 2005.
Currently, Harrison directs Google's global strategic partnerships across its various product lines and business units. He also leads the corporate development team responsible for worldwide acquisitions and investments, having overseen some of the tech giant's most significant deals, including the purchases of YouTube, DoubleClick, Nest, and Motorola. His involvement extended to acquiring DNN Research—a neural networks startup founded by Geoffrey Hinton, a University of Toronto emeritus professor of computer science and Nobel Prize winner, along with two of his graduate students—and later, DeepMind, solidifying Google's position as a frontrunner in advanced AI research. Harrison praises the University of Toronto for its renowned contributions to neural networks and deep learning, largely thanks to Hinton's trailblazing efforts. For beginners, think of neural networks as computer systems inspired by the human brain, enabling machines to learn and make decisions, and deep learning as a subset that processes vast amounts of data to improve accuracy over time.
Harrison emphasizes that harnessing AI's full potential demands substantial financial commitment, fostering creativity while ensuring that legal, ethical, and social structures evolve alongside it. “AI is transitioning from a niche technical specialty to a core technology capable of transforming our existence, work routines, education systems, and communal growth,” he explains. “It demands heavy investment to fuel progress, but also to align our frameworks with these advancements.”
He believes that an endowed chair dedicated to AI and technology within the law school will serve as a vital hub for rigorous exploration of AI's human and legal facets. “The University of Toronto's Faculty of Law is ideally positioned to bring together diverse, multidisciplinary viewpoints,” Harrison adds. “It can function as a platform where technology, economic motivations, public policy, and civil liberties are openly discussed and refined into practices that realize AI's true potential.”
At the heart of this initiative is the Faculty's leadership in law and technology. Professor Anthony Niblett, who presently occupies the Canada Research Chair in Law, Economics, and Innovation, will take on this new role starting January 1, 2026. His scholarly interests encompass AI, innovation, contract law, competition policy, and judicial decision-making. “As the first to hold this chair, Anthony is perfectly suited to deepen our insights into law and technology and their effects on society and the legal field,” Dean Brunnée noted. “It acts as a spark for fresh ideas.”
Niblett observes that innovation undeniably enhances our quality of life—after all, who wouldn't agree that modern living surpasses that of a century ago? “I wish I could live in 100 or 200 years to see it all,” he says with a touch of wistfulness. In his view, the law is essential to innovation due to their intertwined nature. He urges Canada, as a G7 nation, to utilize legal and policy tools to attract more investment into domestic AI ventures. “Robust legal systems promote innovation. How can we employ laws and policies to nurture beneficial technologies for all? How do we regulate emerging tech? And how might new tech refine the law itself? These queries underpin everything I ponder,” Niblett shares.
A prime example of this synergy is Blue J Legal, an AI-powered software for tax research that Niblett co-founded a decade ago with colleagues Benjamin Alarie (Osler Chair in Business Law), Professor Albert Yoon, and Michael J. Trebliccock Chair in Law and Economics. This University of Toronto spin-off recently raised $167 million in funding, led by two American venture capital firms. “Over the past few years, the technology's power has surged dramatically,” Niblett reflects, contrasting it with the basic machine learning of Blue J's early stages. “We no longer need to manually organize data as before; today's large language models can handle intricate inquiries about how specific scenarios align with legal principles.”
Niblett foresees major shifts ahead as language models and computing speeds accelerate unprecedentedly. “We foresaw a future where instant assessments of legality would be possible,” he says. “It's unclear if lengthy court processes are still necessary. Many courts are already using AI to clear backlogs by analyzing case facts, but where's the boundary between machine-generated advice and machine-made rulings?” Despite the rising precision of these models, he insists human lawyers retain a vital role. And this is the part most people miss: AI isn't replacing intuition and judgment—it's amplifying them.
The landscape of legal services is shifting profoundly. “We educate students on legal reasoning, the essence of arguments, and the law's role in society,” Niblett explains. “It's about the journey, not just the destination. Without that, law becomes mere button-pressing, which misses its true spirit.” “Grasping what the law is—and what it ought to be—is crucial to my teaching mission. Yet, legal services will undergo massive changes in the coming decade.”
Harrison concurs, noting AI's ability to democratize legal access, such as simplifying will-drafting or handling minor court issues, thereby advancing justice. He sees immense potential in assisting individuals and small enterprises with these tools as demand grows. “I envision this technology opening new doors for lawyers,” Harrison says. “By automating tedious tasks like document checks and initial research, AI lets professionals concentrate on high-level activities: strategic thinking, inventive solutions, and moral dilemmas.”
In this transition from mundane labor to strategic wisdom, Harrison anticipates a new breed of legal expert at the crossroads of law and AI—one who guides its growth while educating society on its mechanics. “We must ensure technology's advantages are amplified through structures of trust and public good.”
But here's where it gets controversial: Will AI ultimately erode the human element in law, potentially leading to injustices if algorithms inherit biases from flawed data? Or is it the ultimate equalizer, making legal expertise accessible to all? What do you think—should we embrace this AI-driven evolution, or does it risk undermining the very foundations of justice? Share your thoughts in the comments; I'm curious to hear agreements, disagreements, or even wild predictions about tomorrow's legal world!
By Nina Haikara
