Agefi Luxembourg - mai 2026

Mai 2026 33 AGEFI Luxembourg Droit & Travail By Nam NGUYENGROZA, Partner Amrop Luxembourg A rtificial intelligence hasmoved quickly froma topic of curiosity to something farmore tangible in­ side lawfirms.What began as experi­ mentationwithdocument review or research tools is nowstarting to influence howwork is organi­ zed, howclients assess value and howfirms think about their own structure. The shift is not only technological. It iseconomicandcultural,touchingthe way lawyers learn, how they are recruitedandwhatclientsarewillingtopayfor. At its core sits a simple but uncomfortable idea for manyfirms: ifmachines canhandle a growing share of production work, then the value of the lawyer must lie elsewhere. Operational Shift: fromlegal production to cognitive oversight AI tools areundeniably transformingeveryday legal tasks.Draftingacontractorreviewinglargevolumes ofdocumentscannowbedonefarmorequicklythan before. But themore significant change is not speed. It is the nature of the work itself. Junior lawyers are spending less time assembling documents from scratch andmore time reviewing and refining what hasalreadybeengenerated.Thecentreofgravityhas shifted fromproduction to evaluation. This creates a genuine tension. Lawyers can be exposed earlier to more complex thinking, which is welcome. But the traditional path to mastering the basics becomes harder to navigate when the intermediate steps are nolongerthere.Firmsthatassumelearningwillhap­ pen naturally, as it once did, may find that assump­ tion difficult to sustain. Clients are redefiningwhat they are paying for Clients arealreadyusingsimilar tools internallyor at least understand what they can do. As a result, the oldequationbetweentimespentandvaluedelivered is under pressure. A task that can be automated or assisted by technology is difficult to justify at hourly rates. Clients want to understand the value of what they are getting, not how long it took. Clients expect lawyers to use available tools with judgment and to focus attentionwhere it genuinelymat­ ters. In that sense,AI raises expectations just as sharplyasitreducestoleranceforinefficiency. Rethinking knowledge and training Law firms have traditionally relied on a form of apprenticeship. Junior lawyers learn by doing, by repeat­ ing tasks and by observing more experienced colleagues. AI dis­ rupts that rhythm. When a first draft appears instantly, the inter­ mediate steps disappear. Those steps were often where under­ standing was built. Without them,thereisariskthatlawyers rely on outputs they do not fully grasp. Some firms are beginning to adjust. Training becomesmoredeliberate.Insteadoffocusingonhow to produce a document, the emphasis shifts to how tointerrogateit.Whydoesaclauseappearinacertain way. Where could the tool be wrong. This requires time and attention from senior lawyers. It also requires a change in mindset. Efficiency gains are real, but they cannot come at the expense of critical thinking and sound judgment. What younger lawyers nowexpect For those entering the profession, the presence ofAI islargelytakenforgranted.Manyexpecttousethese tools from day one. A firm that cannot offer that environment may struggle to attract them. At the same time, expectations about the nature of the job are shifting. Fewer young lawyers are willing to spendyearsonrepetitivetasksthataddlimitedintel­ lectual value. Theyare looking formeaningful expo­ sure earlier in their career. AI can help meet that expectation, but only if firms rethink how roles are structured. Removing routine work is not enough. What replaces it needs to be intellectually stimulat­ ing. Otherwise, there is a risk of disengagement rather thanmotivation. Evolving hiring criteria: judgment in a techaugmented environment The way firms assess candidates is evolving as well. Legal knowledge remains important, but it is no longer the only focus. Firms are increasingly inter­ ested in how candidates think about technology. Do they understand what AI tools can and cannot do? Aretheyabletousethemsensibly?Cantheyquestion the output rather than accept it at face value? Some recruitment processes now include practical ele­ ments. Candidates may be asked to work with an AIgenerated document and explain what they would change or challenge. The objective is not to test technical sophistication in isolation, but to see how judgment is applied in a different context. Panel selectiondynamics: AImaturity as a competitive differentiator Lawfirms are not the only ones adapting their eval­ uation methods. Clients are doing the same when selecting or reviewing their external counsel. Questions about the use of AI are becoming more common in panel processes. Clients want to under­ standhowfirmsintegratethesetoolsintotheirwork, howtheyprotectsensitiveinformationandhoweffi­ ciency gains are reflected in pricing. This is not just a theoretical exercise, but it weights into decisions on which firms are retained. Avague or unconvincing answer can be enough to raise doubts, particularly when competitors aremore prepared. Organizational evolution: hybrid roles at the intersection of lawand technology As AI becomes more embedded, it is creating new types of responsibility within law firms. In some cases, experienced lawyers are taking on roles that combine legal expertise with a focus on technology. They help select tools, define how they should be used and guide colleagues in their adoption. These arenotpurelytechnicalpositions.Theyrequirecred­ ibility and a clear understanding of how legal work is done in practice. The aim is not to replace lawyers withengineers, but toensure that technology isused in away that enhances professional judgment rather than undermines it. The shift toward judgment as a service Thisiswheretheideaofjudgmentasaservicebegins to take shape. Clients are not paying for the process itself,butforthequalityoftheoutcomeandthethink­ ing behind it. Taken together, these developments pointtowardsomethingmorefundamental:achange in how legal services are conceived. If production work becomes faster andmore standardised, a busi­ nessmodelbuiltonbillingtimebecomesincreasingly hard to sustain. What remains valuable is the ability to interpret, to advise and to take responsibility for decisions in situations that resist easy answers. This has structural consequences for law firms. The traditional lawfirmpyramiddepends on leverage: a relativelysmallnumberofpartnersoverseeingalarg­ er group of associates whose billed hours generate revenue. The economics depend on volume and hours.IfAIreducestheneedforlargeteamstohandle production work, that structure comes under pres­ sure. The pyramid flattens. Fewer layers are needed todeliverthesameoutputandthepartner’sroleshifts towardmoredirectinvolvementinhighvaluework. Firms that continue to rely heavily on leverage as their primary economic engine may find it progres­ sively harder to justify that model to clients and to themselves. Agradual but decisive transition Noneof this ishappeningovernight.Manyfirms are still experimenting, and the billable hour remains firmly in place inmost contexts. There are also legit­ imate concerns around accuracy, confidentiality and professional responsibility.AI is not just another tool to improve efficiency. It is prompting a reassessment of what legal expertise means and how it should be delivered. Firms that approach this as anarrowtech­ nological issue riskmissing the point. The real ques­ tion is how to organize the business around what clients truly value and how to ensure that lawyers develop the capabilities that cannot be automated. Conclusion The impact of AI on law firms is both practical and structural.Itchangeshowworkisdone,butalsohow it is priced, how it is learned and how it is judged by clients. AI is not simply enhancing legal workflows. Itisredefiningtheunderlyinglogicofhowlawfirms create value. Perhaps themost significant shift is the moveawayfromtimeasthecentralmeasureofvalue. In its place comes a greater focus on judgment, on the ability to navigate complexity and provide clear direction in increasingly complex, ambiguous situa­ tions. This shift elevates the role of the lawyer while simultaneouslynarrowing themargin for inefficien­ cy or commoditized work. As the need for leverage decreases, the traditional pyramid begins to lose its relevance. For lawfirms, the challenge is not simply to adopt new tools. It is to adapt their thinking to a model where what matters most is no longer how much time is spent, but judgment. HowAI Is Reshaping Law Firms: Toward Judgment, Not Hours L ’Assemblée générale de la FEDIL, or­ ganisée le 27 avril, a approuvé le rap­ port d’activité ainsi que les comptes de l’exercice 2025. Cette réunion a égale­ ment marqué un changement à la tête de la fédération industrielle avec l’entrée en fonction d’Alex Schumann, qui succède à Georges Rassel. Dans son bilan annuel, la FEDIL souligne que l’an­ née 2025 a été fortement marquée par les tensions géopolitiques, les incertitudes économiques et les difficultés affectant le commerce international. La fédérationévoquenotamment l’impact des tensions commerciales persistantes et de la guerre en Iran, qui continuedepuis ledébut de l’année 2026 àpeser sur les coûts de l’énergie et des matières premières. Face à cette situation, l’organisation patronale es­ time qu’il devient essentiel d’apporter des réponses politiques rapides afinde préserver la compétitivité des entreprises luxembourgeoises. La FEDILad’ail­ leurs salué l’annonce d’une future réunion Tripar­ tite, considérée comme un rendezvous crucial pour préserver le modèle luxembourgeois du dia­ logue social et répondre aux conséquences écono­ miques de la crise actuelle. La fédération s’est également fortement mobilisée sur les dossiers européens liés à la compétitivité et à la simplification administrative. Elle a suivi de près les paquets réglementaires européens « Om­ nibus », destinés à harmoniser et alléger certaines obligations en matière de durabilité, de reporting et de numérique. Selon la FEDIL, plusieurs avan­ cées ont permis d’éviter une surcharge administra­ tive excessive pour les entreprises. Les enjeux numériques et technologiques ont oc­ cupé une place importante dans les travaux de l’organisation. L’essor de l’intelligence artificielle, les questions de cybersécurité ainsi que l’évolution des compétences professionnelles ont été au centre des réflexions. La FEDILa notamment élaboré une stratégie sur l’intelligence artificielle pour un Luxembourg «compétitif et résilient», tout en réa­ lisant une enquête sur l’adoption de l’IAdans l’in­ dustrie. Elle a également lancé les «Luxembourg AI ExcellenceAwards». Le dossier énergétique demeure lui aussi une prio­ ritémajeure. Malgré une légère détente observée à la finde l’année 2025, la FEDILestime que les coûts de l’énergie restent nettement supérieurs à ceux de plusieurs concurrents internationaux. L’organisa­ tion continue ainsi de défendre des mesures desti­ nées à renforcer la compétitivité énergétique du pays, notamment à travers le dialogue national sur l’énergie et le suivi des mécanismes européens liés aux quotas d’émissions et au mécanisme d’ajuste­ ment carbone aux frontières (CBAM). Sur le plan social, les discussions autour du droit du travail, des pensions et de l’organisation du tra­ vail ont également rythmé l’année. La FEDIL plaide pour une modernisation du cadre social afin de préserver l’attractivité économique du Luxembourg. Pour son mandat, Alex Schumann a défini trois grandes priorités : accélérer l’investissement indus­ triel, renforcer les ressources humaines et consoli­ der la position internationale du Luxembourg. La première priorité concerne la simplification des procédures administratives et le soutien à l’inves­ tissement industriel. Selon la FEDIL, les entreprises continuent de faire face à des délais d’autorisation trop longs, à unmanque de terrains disponibles et à des procédures complexes. L’organisation réclame unemeilleure coordination administrative ainsi qu’une réduction significative des délais afin de favoriser la transformation in­ dustrielle, la digitalisation et la décarbonation. La deuxième priorité porte sur les talents et l’or­ ganisation du travail. La fédération souligne les difficultés de recrutement, les besoins en forma­ tion continue ainsi que la concurrence croissante exercée par le secteur public sur lemarché de l’em­ ploi. Elle encourage également une accélération de la digitalisation et de l’automatisation au sein de l’État afin d’améliorer la productivité. Les ques­ tions liées à la flexibilité du travail et au logement sont aussi identifiées comme des enjeux essentiels pour attirer et retenir les talents. Enfin, la FEDIL souhaite renforcer la place du Luxembourg dans les chaînes de valeur euro­ péennes et mondiales. Elle défend une politique énergétique conciliant sécurité d’approvisionne­ ment, prix compétitifs et objectifs dedécarbonation, tout en plaidant pour une réglementation numé­ rique proportionnée et des accords commerciaux favorisant l’accès aux marchés internationaux. L’Assemblée générale apar ailleurs validéplusieurs changements au sein du Conseil d’administration. RaymondAckermann et IsabelleDennewald rejoi­ gnent le Conseil d’administration, tandis que Georges Rassel quitte ses fonctions après plusieurs années d’engagement en faveur de l’industrie luxembourgeoise. Source : FEDIL Assemblée générale de la FEDIL L’industrie luxembourgeoise face aux nouveaux défis économiques ©FEDIL