AI makes a matter take fewer hours. That saving does not disappear. It lands with someone.
Bill by the hour and it lands with the client. Charge a lump sum and it lands with the firm. Pay your AI vendor by usage and part of it lands with the vendor. Most firms haven't decided which, so the decision gets made for them.
The short answer
- The saving follows the pricing model. Hourly: the client keeps it and the firm's revenue falls. Lump sum: the firm keeps it as margin. Usage-priced tools: the vendor takes a share.
- Vendors are moving to usage pricing. Gartner predicts that by 2028, consumption-based pricing will account for over 35% of net new corporate legal technology spend with major vendors.
- You can't price what you haven't costed. Before you change a fee, cost the matter by activity. That shows where AI saves time and where it doesn't.
A worked example
Take one matter: reviewing and negotiating a commercial lease for a corporate client. The figures below are illustrative assumptions, not market data. Replace them with your own.
| Before AI | With AI | |
|---|---|---|
| Hours on the matter | 40 | 26 |
| Blended rate | AED 1,200 | AED 1,200 |
| AI tool cost for the matter | 0 | AED 600 |
Hourly billing. Before AI the firm bills 40 × 1,200 = AED 48,000. With AI it bills 26 × 1,200 = AED 31,200, and pays AED 600 for the tool. Revenue falls by AED 16,800. The client keeps the saving.
Lump sum. The firm quotes AED 48,000 either way. With AI it spends 14 fewer hours and AED 600 on the tool. The firm keeps the saving as capacity: 14 hours it can sell on the next matter.
Lump sum with a shared saving. The firm quotes AED 42,000 and still uses 14 fewer hours. The client saves AED 6,000. The firm frees 14 hours for an AED 6,000 price cut, and wins the next mandate on price.
The third option is where most firms will end up. The question is whether you choose the split or a client chooses it for you.
Why the Gulf is different
Lump-sum and fixed fees are already common in Gulf practice, so many firms here are closer to the "firm keeps it" model than their London or New York peers.
Success fees have also opened up in the UAE. Under Federal Law 34/2022, in force since 2 January 2023, advocates can agree contingency payments of up to 25% of the amount the court awards. Check the exact article and its conditions before you write one into an engagement letter.
A percentage fee reacts to AI in a fourth way. Your fee stays tied to the result, and every hour AI saves becomes margin.
Step 1: cost by activity, not by blended rate
A blended rate hides where the time goes. Split the matter into activities, then cost each one.
| Activity (lease example) | Hours before | Hours with AI | Who does it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intake and fact gathering | 4 | 3 | Associate |
| First review against client playbook | 12 | 5 | Associate |
| Issues list and risk memo | 8 | 5 | Associate, partner review |
| Negotiation calls and markups | 12 | 10 | Partner |
| Final checks and signing | 4 | 3 | Associate |
| **Total** | **40** | **26** |
Illustrative. The pattern is the point: AI saves most on first review and drafting, and least on negotiation and judgment calls. That tells you which parts of a matter can be priced as a product and which still need hourly or partner time.
Step 2: decide the split before the client does
Three positions you can take, and when each fits:
- Keep it. Lump sum unchanged. Fits matters where the client buys an outcome and doesn't track hours.
- Share it. Lower lump sum, same or better margin. Fits panel work and repeat clients who will benchmark you.
- Pass it on. Hourly with fewer hours. Fits disputes where scope can't be predicted.
Step 3: watch your own AI bill
If your AI tools charge by usage, your heaviest users become your largest cost line. Gartner's analyst puts the right question this way: "Which legal outcomes justify the AI consumption required to achieve them?"
Put the tool cost into the activity sheet as its own line per matter. If you can't see it per matter, you can't price it.
Where HAQQ Legal AI fits
HAQQ Legal AI combines practice management and legal AI, so time, matters and AI work sit in one system. That makes the activity-level view above easier to build from your own data instead of estimates. The pricing decision stays yours.
Încercați HAQQ AI gratuit
Experimentați redactarea juridică și cercetarea asistate de AI
Frequently asked questions
Does AI kill the billable hour?
Not overnight. It makes hourly billing worse for the firm on any matter where AI saves time, which pushes firms toward lump sums.
Are contingency fees allowed in the UAE?
Yes, under conditions. Federal Law 34/2022 lets advocates agree contingency payments of up to 25% of the amount the court awards. Confirm the article before relying on it.
What is consumption-based pricing?
Paying a vendor for usage (queries, documents or compute) instead of per seat. Gartner expects it to exceed 35% of net new corporate legal tech spend with major vendors by 2028.
Where do I start?
Pick one repeat matter type. Cost it by activity for five recent files. Then decide the split.
Sources and further reading
- Lawyers Weekly, "How usage-based AI pricing will change a legal team's budget", 8 September 2026
- Gartner, "Gartner Says General Counsel Must Get Ready for Consumption-Based AI Pricing", 3 September 2026
- Norton Rose Fulbright, "New UAE and Dubai laws bring in tighter regulation of UAE legal professionals"
- Al Kabban & Associates, "UAE contingency fees: the 25% rule"
