SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Deutsch 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Einloggen
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • Über SSOAR
  • Leitlinien
  • Veröffentlichen auf SSOAR
  • Kooperieren mit SSOAR
    • Kooperationsmodelle
    • Ablieferungswege und Formate
    • Projekte
  • Kooperationspartner
    • Informationen zu Kooperationspartnern
  • Informationen
    • Möglichkeiten für den Grünen Weg
    • Vergabe von Nutzungslizenzen
    • Informationsmaterial zum Download
  • Betriebskonzept
Browsen und suchen Dokument hinzufügen OAI-PMH-Schnittstelle
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Volltext herunterladen

(externe Quelle)

Zitationshinweis

Bitte beziehen Sie sich beim Zitieren dieses Dokumentes immer auf folgenden Persistent Identifier (PID):
https://doi.org/10.1515/zfrs-2025-2004

Export für Ihre Literaturverwaltung

Bibtex-Export
Endnote-Export

Statistiken anzeigen
Weiterempfehlen
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Navigating Jurisdictional Boundaries: Traditional Lawyers vs. Legal Tech Firms in the German Legal Services Market

Die Bewältigung jurisdiktioneller Berufskonflikte: Die Anwaltschaft im Wettbewerb mit Legal Tech-Unternehmen auf dem deutschen Rechtsdienstleistungsmarkt
[Zeitschriftenartikel]

Günther, Philipp
Behr, Johanna
Thies, Leonie

Abstract

The recent rise of legal tech firms has led to significant changes in the German legal services market, challenging the quasi-monopoly of traditional lawyers. Our paper explores this evolving relationship between legal tech firms and traditional lawyers in Germany, focusing on how these groups compe... mehr

The recent rise of legal tech firms has led to significant changes in the German legal services market, challenging the quasi-monopoly of traditional lawyers. Our paper explores this evolving relationship between legal tech firms and traditional lawyers in Germany, focusing on how these groups compete, cooperate, and forge distinct professional identities. Drawing on Andrew Abbott’s theory of professions, we examine whether there is a jurisdictional conflict between them, i. e., whether they compete for the same work-related tasks. By conducting semi-structured interviews with individuals working in the field and a document analysis of relevant public statements and legal texts, we find that there is at least some degree of jurisdictional conflict, albeit limited to a specific segment of the legal services market, particularly tenancy law. In addition, legal tech firms have developed work practices that differ significantly from those of traditional lawyers, emphasizing automated workflows and largely eschewing in-person consultations. These novel practices have also led to the emergence of a new identity for legal tech entrepreneurs, one that emphasizes entrepreneurship and consumer advocacy. Despite the differences and conflicts, there currently appears to be a cooperative division between traditional lawyers and legal tech companies, suggesting functional interdependence in certain market segments.... weniger

Thesaurusschlagwörter
Rechtswesen; Rechtsanwalt; Automatisierung; Digitalisierung; Bundesrepublik Deutschland

Klassifikation
Kriminalsoziologie, Rechtssoziologie, Kriminologie

Freie Schlagwörter
Jurisdictional Conflicts; Legal Market; Legal Tech; Professions; Sociology of Law

Sprache Dokument
Englisch

Publikationsjahr
2025

Seitenangabe
S. 1-29

Zeitschriftentitel
Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie, 45 (2025) 1

ISSN
2366-0392

Status
Veröffentlichungsversion; begutachtet (peer reviewed)

Lizenz
Creative Commons - Namensnennung 4.0


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Impressum  |  Betriebskonzept  |  Datenschutzerklärung
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.