Agentic AI in Law: How Australian Firms Can Evolve Workflows While Protecting Data

Artificial intelligence is transforming the legal industry, there’s no doubt about that, but the conversation is shifting from chatbots and generative AI to something far more powerful: agentic AI.

The legal profession is no stranger to technological disruption. From the typewriter to e-discovery, each wave has been met with initial scepticism and eventual assimilation. But today’s technological shift feels different.

For law firms across Australia, this is not merely a technological curiosity. It is a development that will alter the cadence of legal practice, from the construction of arguments to the administration of client matters.

Agentic AI promises faster research, smarter drafting, and streamlined litigation support, but it also raises urgent questions around data privacy, sovereignty, and client trust.

As Greg Dickason, Chief Technology Officer for Innovation at LexisNexis, explained in a recent podcast, agentic AI represents the next leap forward, and it’s because it goes beyond text generation, allowing models to reason, use tools, orchestrate workflows, and even self-correct.

What Is Agentic AI?

Agentic AI introduces the element of autonomy to generative AI. While generative AI is capable of producing text, drafting documents, and responding to inquiries, agentic AI enhances these capabilities by enabling greater independent action.

This shift means AI is no longer limited to single tasks. Instead, it can break down complex legal workflows into steps - mirroring how law firm teams collaborate.

“Agentic AI is when you give models the ability to reason so they can think through what they’re going to do and to use tools so they can actually go and do things… often the combination means you can refer to them as agents because they become almost autonomous.” - Greg Dickason.

From Generative AI to Specialised Workflows

Lawyers don’t work alone; they divide tasks across partners, associates, clerks, and specialists. Similarly, agentic AI mirrors this structure with specialised agents that reason, critique, and apply tools to achieve defined goals.

In practical terms, this means:

• A research AI agent can synthesise precedents across multiple jurisdictions.
• A drafting AI agent can propose clauses grounded in statutory frameworks.
• An appraisal AI agent can interrogate its own output, revising until it meets specified criteria.

This ‘division of labour’ model reflects the organisational structure commonly found in contemporary chambers or firms, enabling lawyers to concentrate on strategic matters and client relationship management.

“We don’t put that all in one model in one agent, we break it up into pieces and orchestrate them… that’s what we’re doing at LexisNexis, having the ability to have an agentic workflow.” - Greg Dickason.

Practical Use Cases for Law Firms

Why should this matter in Australia? Because the legal system is both federal and state-based, which creates layers of complexity.

Take a commercial lawyer in Sydney advising on a national retail rollout for example. They may need to consider New South Wales tenancy laws, Queensland consumer protection requirements, and Victoria’s occupational health and safety framework - all within the same matter.

Or think of a litigator preparing for a class action that spans multiple jurisdictions, where procedural rules differ in each state.

In such contexts, pulling together these strands is painstaking work, and efficiency is imperative to maintaining professional standards.

For clients, this means faster, more consistent advice across borders, and for lawyers, it means more time spent on the high-value work of strategy, advocacy, and client care.

With agentic AI, a research agent can rapidly synthesise precedents and statutes across jurisdictions, a drafting agent can generate tailored clauses that reflect both Commonwealth and state law, and an appraisal agent can refine outputs to ensure consistency across documents.

Data Privacy and Security: The Questions That Matter

Yet here lies the paradox: the more context an AI system has, the more accurate it becomes. But in law, context is often synonymous with privilege and confidentiality.

As Greg cautioned:

“When you’re using an agent, you’ve got to give it context… sometimes that means you can potentially put in confidential data, which you should be very concerned about unless you know where the data has been hosted, what purging is going to happen, and whether it’s going to be used to train the models.”

For Australian lawyers, the questions to ask are clear:

• Where is the data physically hosted?
• Does it leave Australia?
• How long is it stored, and under what safeguards?
• Could it ever be used to train external models?

These aren’t theoretical, they go to the heart of legal professional obligations and the trust clients place in their counsel.

Related: Agentic AI in Australia: Legal and Transparent Solutions for Privacy Risks

From Risk to Advantage

Agentic AI pushes us to rethink what makes lawyers indispensable. If research and drafting can be partially delegated, what remains unique is judgment, advocacy, and foresight.

Perhaps it is judgment, advocacy, and the persuasive arts. Perhaps it is the ability to see not just what the law is, but where it might go.

Agentic AI is not just an upgrade from generative AI; it’s a reimagining of how legal work is done.

One insight from Greg’s work is clear: AI untethered from authoritative legal content can be dangerous. Hallucinations may be tolerated in consumer apps, but they are intolerable in law.

For many, research-based workflows models need to be based on grounded models; those trained and tested against trusted, jurisdiction-specific content.

That is the philosophy underpinning Lexis+ AI: advanced workflows integrated with Australia’s most comprehensive legal corpus, delivered with the safeguards firms need.

Properly governed, agentic AI is not a threat but a force multiplier. It can enhance efficiency without compromising ethics, and it can deepen analysis without eroding professional judgment.

The future of legal practice in Australia will not belong to those who resist technology, nor to those who embrace it blindly. It will belong to those who harness it with discernment - insisting on accuracy, protecting privilege, and preserving the human qualities that AI cannot replicate.