Abstract
The aim of this study was to identify the fundamentals for the effective application of artificial intelligence (AI) in the legal field through analysing theoretical frameworks and comparing international regulatory models. The research was based on a systematic review of academic literature and a comparative analysis of regulatory approaches. Five key theoretical paradigms concerning AI use in jurisprudence were identified: technological determinism, which asserts the inevitable transformation of legal practice; critical legal theories emphasising the reproduction of structural biases; socio-technical constructivism with its concept of mutual co-determinacy between law and technology; regulatory realism focusing on practical normative measures; and the institutional approach that examines the adaptive processes of legal organisations. The study revealed varying levels of technological maturity across different areas of legal activity, with the automation of legal research and document analysis demonstrating the highest development, while the automation of judicial proceedings remains experimental. A comparative analysis of the regulatory models of the European Union, the United States, and Singapore uncovered three fundamentally different regulatory philosophies: a preventive European approach with mandatory certification and fines of up to 6% of global turnover, a market-driven American model with minimal state intervention, and a pragmatically flexible Singaporean approach with voluntary standards. The categorisation of challenges associated with AI use included nine risk categories, from technological hallucinations to institutional transformations within the legal profession.