Meet the lawyers of LawY: Prathna Tiwari

Hi Prathna, tell us a bit about yourself and your experience in law.

My journey in law began in a small boutique firm in FNQ where I had the opportunity to work closely with an exceptional mentor, the founding partner. I was deeply attached to that firm and, for a long time, I imagined becoming a partner there. It felt like the natural progression, and at one point I was close to signing on the dotted line.

However, at twenty-six, I had a moment of reflection. I realised that while I loved the firm and the people in it, I did not want to commit so early to one narrow path. I wanted to explore the many ways in which a law degree could be used, and I felt it was too soon to lock myself into something that might limit that exploration. So, I made the difficult decision to step away, and though some found it surprising, it proved to be one of the best decisions I ever made.

A few years later, I moved to Sydney after meeting my husband and seeking a change of scenery. I joined an in-house property law team with a telecommunications infrastructure company, and that experience was transformative. It required me to think differently, not just as a lawyer but as a business adviser. I began to consider risk in a broader sense, not merely the legal implications, and learned to appreciate that sometimes the best outcome was not a perfect one, but the one that best mitigated risk for the business.

When the opportunity at LawY arose, I immediately knew it was something I wanted to pursue. Having worked in a small firm with limited resources, I had always been drawn to legal technology and innovation. I was constantly thinking about how to work smarter, not harder, and I had been one of the first in my firm to introduce tools like Dragon Dictate and PEXA at a time when many were hesitant to embrace electronic conveyancing. That mindset naturally led me towards LawY, a role that brought together my love of the law, my curiosity about technology, and my desire to make a tangible impact on the way lawyers work.

Thinking back to your time in private practice, what day-to-day frustrations did you face that you wish LawY had solved back then?

One of the biggest challenges in private practice, particularly as a young lawyer, was learning to bridge the gap between academic and practical communication. Law school teaches you to write for academics, not clients, and when you step into practice, you quickly discover how important it is to explain complex legal concepts in simple, accessible language. My clients were often small business owners, farmers, or families — people who wanted to understand, not be overwhelmed by legal jargon.

If LawY had existed then, it would have been an invaluable support. I could have drafted letters or advice and asked LawY to adjust the tone or simplify certain explanations, saving time and allowing me to focus on substance. It would also have given me greater confidence early in my career. When I started, I was the only other lawyer in the firm apart from my principal, who had almost four decades of experience. I remember thinking carefully before knocking on his door with a question. If I had had LawY, I could have gone to him with more polished drafts and well-formed ideas. It would have accelerated my learning and helped me develop faster.

How does being a lawyer yourself influence the way you approach contributing to the design and evolution of LawY?

Lawyers are, by nature, a sceptical group. We are trained to identify risk, find flaws, and test assumptions. Having been in practice, I understand that mentality deeply, and it shapes the way I think about product design and user experience every day.

When I test new features or provide feedback on our user interface, I am thinking like the lawyer who is under pressure, juggling multiple matters, and looking for something that simply works. I know what it is to be that person — pressed for time, managing client expectations, and needing answers quickly. That perspective helps ensure our products are practical, intuitive, and genuinely valuable in real-world practice.

What makes LawY unique is that it truly is built by lawyers for lawyers. Many members of our team, including some of our developers, are legally trained. That combination of legal understanding and technical expertise means we can translate the real needs of practitioners into effective technological solutions. It is not about creating something that just looks impressive; it is about creating something that genuinely serves the profession.

What is your favourite feature in LawY that you wish you had when you started practising law?

Without question, the Case Summariser and its ability to distil information from the URL of any case or piece of legislation. It is such an intelligent and efficient tool. When I think back to university and the countless hours I spent reading lengthy judgments, only to realise halfway through that they were not relevant to my research, I wish I had something like this.

The Case Summariser provides concise, accurate summaries of cases within moments. It has the ability to process vast amounts of information and distil it into something usable and insightful almost instantly. For any lawyer, whether a junior or senior practitioner, it is an incredible time-saver and a wonderful example of how AI can enhance legal research.

What kind of feedback have you received from other lawyers?

The feedback we have received has been overwhelmingly positive. One aspect that particularly resonates with lawyers is our human verification feature. Many practitioners express concerns about how to verify AI-generated content, which is an entirely valid question. What excites people about LawY is that they can have their queries reviewed by another lawyer, someone who is a subject matter expert in the relevant area of law.

For example, a property lawyer in Far North Queensland can ask a question that touches on estate planning and have it verified by a specialist in that field. It does not replace the lawyer’s own judgement, but it provides reassurance and a strong starting point. Every time I explain this feature, I can see how it changes perceptions. Lawyers understand that it is a safety net that supports — not substitutes — their expertise, and that makes a world of difference.

What inspired your shift from private practice to working in-house, and eventually into legal tech?

Honestly, once I decided partnership wasn't for me, it was like this weight lifted. I could suddenly see all these other paths I hadn't let myself consider. But I had to move to Sydney first. As much as I loved FNQ, the opportunities I was looking for just weren't there.

Going in-house was exactly the shift I needed. I wasn't just answering one-off legal questions anymore, I was actually helping shape strategy and drive business decisions. That's when I realised this was scratching the same itch that partnership would have. I wanted to be part of the bigger picture, not just the legal side of things.

And legal tech? That was always this dream in the back of my mind. I was constantly creating workarounds and tech solutions at the firm and in-house, so when the opportunity came up, I jumped at it without thinking twice. It felt like the natural next step, except now I get to help build something that actually transforms how legal work gets done.

Were there any pivotal moments in your career that made you rethink how legal work should be done?

Absolutely. Working in property law taught me a lot about efficiency and value. Many of our matters were fixed-fee, and clients were extremely cost conscious. The challenge was that the time and effort required to complete the work often far exceeded what could be billed, which meant significant write-offs at times.

That experience made me think deeply about how we could practise law more sustainably. LawY offers a way to bridge that gap, to allow lawyers to deliver high-quality work efficiently and profitably, without compromising client outcomes. It has the potential to make legal services more affordable while also ensuring firms remain commercially viable. For me, that balance is the key to the future of legal practice.

From your experience, what do you think is holding many law firms back from embracing technology like LawY?

The legal profession is steeped in tradition. We are one of the oldest professions in the world, and change does not come easily. But I do not believe lawyers are resistant; rather, they are cautious. They want proof that a new tool will work, that it will add genuine value, and that it will not compromise quality or ethics.

When I first started practising, my mentor used to tell me stories about conducting title searches by walking down to the titles office and copying documents by hand with carbon paper. When I began practising, the same process was done with a few clicks online using Infotrack. Similarly when I started practising property law settlements were done by giving the seller physical cheque. Later I started doing these through clicks of a few button on an ELNO. We do adapt; we just need to be convinced that the change is safe, ethical and worthwhile.

That is why my focus at LawY is on authenticity and quality. Lawyers will not adopt technology because it looks impressive; they will adopt it because its safe, it works and because it makes their professional lives easier.

How do you think technology is reshaping the lawyer–client relationship?

Technology has already had a profound impact on the lawyer–client relationship. Even something as simple as email has changed expectations; clients now anticipate faster responses and more constant availability.

What we are also seeing is that clients are more informed than ever before. They have access to online tools and AI systems, and they often arrive at their lawyer’s office with preconceived ideas about their case or even a self-diagnosed solution. This has changed the dynamic. Lawyers must now guide and educate clients through information, not simply provide it.

At the same time, technology has created opportunities for greater efficiency and transparency. Clients want value, speed, and clarity. Firms that embrace technology can deliver all three. Those that do not will inevitably fall behind, because the standard of service expected by clients has fundamentally evolved.

What misconceptions do you think lawyers often have about legal tech?

There are two main misconceptions. The first is that legal tech is a shortcut; that using it somehow diminishes your professionalism or makes you a lazy lawyer. That could not be further from the truth. Tools like LawY do not replace your legal reasoning; they support it. They handle the time-consuming, procedural work so that you can focus on analysis, strategy, and advocacy (the parts of law that truly require human judgement).

The second misconception is at the opposite end of the spectrum, that because AI looks impressive, it must be infallible. Some lawyers place too much faith in it without properly verifying the output. The reality is that you remain the expert. Technology can assist, but it cannot think critically or apply ethical reasoning. As I often say, AI does not have a law degree;  you do.

What trends in the legal industry excite you most right now?

I am fascinated by the evolving expectations of junior lawyers. The new generation entering the profession is incredibly tech-savvy, and the baseline level of competence is shifting rapidly. They will be expected to know how to use tools like LawY safely and efficiently from day one, and that is both exciting and challenging.

I am looking forward to seeing how this new breed of lawyers will combine traditional legal training with digital proficiency. It is going to redefine what good legal practice looks like and set a higher standard for everyone in the profession.

How do you balance innovation with the need to stay compliant and accurate in a legal context?

At LawY, we never innovate for innovation’s sake. Every idea is tested through two essential questions: will lawyers use it, and should lawyers use it? That distinction is critical.

We are acutely aware of the ethical frameworks governing the profession, including the court practice directions on the use of AI in legal work. Compliance and data security are always at the forefront of what we do. Before any feature is released, it is rigorously assessed to ensure it aligns with professional obligations and our users’ expectations of integrity and accuracy. We also spend a lot of time and effort in training our users about safe and effective use of AI.

As lawyers, we are trained to identify risk, and that instinct serves us well. It ensures we do not just build exciting products; we build responsible ones.