How Europe’s In-House Leaders are Thinking About AI, Value and Risk

The role of AI in legal is growing at pace, but getting value from it is much more challenging than simply buying the latest tools. At In-House Tech Europe 2026, senior in-house professionals from across the continent addressed the questions they are grappling with most: how do you build a legal team that’s truly AI-ready, who takes ownership of risk when AI hallucinates, and how can compliance keep up with the pace of business?

Set among the modern pedestrian boulevards and ancient Moorish architecture of Málaga, Spain, Alternative Events’ In-House Tech Europe took place on 8-10 June. Now in its third year, the conference welcomed a powerful mix of senior legal leadership, compliance directors, and legal ops innovators.

Following a sun-drenched welcome reception of tapas and drinks on the first evening, the mood was aglow with anticipation for the start of the conference – expertly led by Markus Warmholz, Head of Corporate & International Legal Affairs & Operations, Hartmann Group.

The AI Maturity Advantage for Legal Teams

Artificial Intelligence has patently become a disruptive force in the legal industry, yet turning experimentation into real organisational capability remains a challenge and was a key component of conversations both on and off stage.

According to the 2026 Axiom In-House Legal AI Report, 96% of in-house legal teams are now using AI in some capacity, but only 7% of teams have scaled it across legal operations.

In her keynote, Saideh Ahmadloo, Global Lead Counsel at Booking.com, explored why this gap persists. She argued that when organisations with different industries, budgets and AI ambitions face the same barriers, the challenge is not the technology itself but the legal AI maturity.

She introduced Lexgit, the Legal AI Maturity Model, a practical framework that measures AI maturity through seven signals across eight stages, helping legal teams understand what it really takes to scale AI responsibly.

Why Human Judgement Remains Indispensable

Another major takeaway from several panel discussions on AI across the two days was the non-negotiable role of human judgement in the legal function. While AI is highly capable of drafting documents, managing contracts and automating workflows, as highlighted in a keynote by headline sponsor Morae, this should not be at the expense of human accountability.

The point was raised by the day two panel discussion, “Legal: The Next Generation,” reflecting on the evolving function of legal against a backdrop of technological innovation and the potential efficiency gains therein. “I also celebrate KPIs and efficiency – but I think what we really need to focus on right now for the legal teams is judgement,” noted Natacha Podymski Ribeiro, Group Senior Legal Counsel, Interparking Group. “That’s something I think AI will not be able to take from legal professionals.”

Sound decision making relies on a solid knowledge base, though a lack of AI transparency risks compromising this, creating friction and misalignment between parties. Speakers discussed how in-house teams can no longer assume how external firms work: terms must explicitly dictate when AI should be used, and when it should not. Transparency around AI usage is particularly pertinent to the longstanding conversation around the billable hour, both in terms of how it is used, and whether efficiency savings are being passed on.

There was disagreement about the long-anticipated “decline of the billable hour” in day one’s “Big Conversation… Redefining value and partnership in the age of AI”: some argued the concept was “on its way to hospital,” with the market moving toward value-based pricing, while others took the view that it would simply evolve.

Stop Managing Regulation, Start Managing Risk

Besides the rapidly evolving technological landscape, the legal and business ecosystem in which it operates drove other conversations. Part of this involved reappraising the role of in-house counsel: from legal advisors to business partners, actively engaging with colleagues to understand risks and shape compliance strategies.

For compliance teams themselves, panellists on “Europe’s regulatory reset” stressed the importance of focusing first on internal bureaucracy and fostering a culture that proactively addresses internal processes that could lead to compliance issues, rather than just external regulations. As one person put it, robust internal compliance exists independent of the regulatory environment – even without external rules, risk remains.

Prioritising internal compliance in this way could require a mindset shift, one which Martin Reichetseder, Director Legal Services & Group Compliance Officer, TGW Logistics, framed as moving towards “compliance by design,” and “governance via processes.” This would entail compliance teams getting in the trenches with their colleagues and shaping products from the ground up, as well as the embedding of risk management into daily operations, helping compliance become a guardrail rather than a bottleneck.

Ultimately, the goal is to allow in-house legal to operate at the pace of the wider business, but making that change is easier said than done.

We’d love to hear your thoughts on the questions below:

Picasso and the Power of Community 

Attendees and speakers continually emphasised that the event felt less like a traditional conference and more like “coming home to a community,” where shared challenges and unfiltered experiences were exchanged. 

The highlight of the various networking sessions held over tapas was a memorable tour of the Picasso Museum. This provided a striking metaphor for the disruptive force of AI, since the artist’s work exemplifies extreme abstraction that not only obliterates the status quo, but also requires those who interact with it to step out of their comfort zones, question established truths and think critically. 

Join us for the next Alternative In-House Europe on 8-9 June 2027, NH Málaga, Spain