LIECHTENSTEIN Law and Practice Contributed by: Christoph Bruckschweiger, Benedikt König, Philipp Benda and Magdalena Marxer-Friedrich, paragraph 7
10.2 Impact The impact of artificial intelligence on dispute resolu- tion in Liechtenstein is currently the subject of ongo- ing debate, particularly regarding the tension between procedural efficiency and inherent risks such as algo- rithmic bias and data security. Nevertheless, it remains undisputed that the core prin- ciples of the legal profession must be upheld. This is true especially for the duty of lawyers to maintain an independent and autonomous practice, as well as the strict preservation of professional secrecy. Fur- thermore, there is a clear consensus that the evalu- ative stages of any judicial decision must be strictly reserved for a human judge. While AI is recognised in certain instances as an aux- iliary tool, it needs to be handled with extreme caution to ensure that the Liechtenstein legal framework con- tinues to prioritise human judicial oversight, reasoned accountability, and the absolute protection of client Looking ahead, we predict that the evolution of AI in Liechtenstein will be characterised by a “controlled modernisation”. While the jurisdiction is unlikely to resist technological advancement, any integration of AI will be strictly bal- anced against the fundamental pillars of the Liechten- stein legal system. Specifically, the right to be heard, the principle of the free assessment of evidence by a human judge, and the strict maintenance of official and professional duties remain of paramount importance. Consequently, we anticipate that AI will continue to be treated solely as an auxiliary tool, ensuring that the core evaluative judicial functions and standards of professional conduct remain a human endeavour, thus preserving the high standards of due process and confidentiality that define the jurisdiction. confidentiality. 10.3 Future
award is invoked was not given proper notice or was unable to present their case; jurisdictional excess; the subject matter is not capable of settlement by arbitra- tion under Liechtenstein law; or the enforcement of the award would be contrary to Liechtenstein public policy.
10. Dispute Resolution and AI 10.1 Regulation
For the time being, there is no standalone AI legisla- tion in Liechtenstein. While the EU AI Act has been adopted at the EU level, it has not yet been formally incorporated into the EEA Agreement and is therefore not yet directly applicable in Liechtenstein. The current regulatory environment is instead defined by Liechtenstein’s commitment to the Council of Europe’s AI Framework Convention (signed in Febru- ary 2025), which mandates that AI use must protect the right to a fair trial and ensure human oversight. The fundamental principles of the Liechtenstein Code of Civil Procedure ensure the right to be heard and imply a requirement for human-led adjudication, as judicial tasks are considered personal duties of the appointed judge or arbitrator. The Law on the Legal Profession stipulates the duty of lawyers to maintain an independent and autonomous professional practice. This prevents the full delegation of legal analysis to AI and ensures that the legal prac- titioner remains personally responsible for all work products and strategic decisions.
329 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook