Automated report. This article was drafted by software from the sources listed below, checked automatically against them, and read by the editor, Sam Allcock, before it was published. Law Week labels every article produced this way. A person is answerable for it: if something here is wrong, write to editor@lawweek.co.uk and we will correct it on the page and say what changed.
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader has adopted Harvey, the legal AI platform, across its Corporate and Finance, Litigation and Arbitration, and Regulatory and IP practices. Harvey first announced the adoption on its website on 16 October 2026, and the company has since sent the announcement to Law Week.
How the firm is using it
According to Harvey, the firm and Harvey’s team have worked together to build the tool into everyday legal work through practice group office hours, tailored workshops and one to one sessions with senior lawyers. Lawyers at the firm have also built custom agents for knowledge management, capital markets and international arbitration, and the two sides have built playbooks together.
Harvey says the aim is to strengthen legal analysis and the advice the firm gives clients. The announcement does not give the number of lawyers using the platform, the offices involved or the cost.
What they said
Miguel Zaldivar, chief executive of Hogan Lovells Cadwalader, said: “Through Harvey, we’re perfecting the ways to capture and apply the expertise that exists across our firm on a variety of legal work. That has helped our lawyers work more effectively and strengthens the support and advice we provide to clients.”
John Haddock, chief business officer at Harvey, said: “Hogan Lovells Cadwalader has a clear vision for how Harvey can elevate its lawyers’ work and client service. We’re proud to build alongside a firm with that ambition and help shape what comes next.”
Context
Large firms are moving generative AI from trials into daily practice, as we reported in firms move generative AI from pilot to everyday practice. For what these tools can do and where they go wrong, see our explainer on AI in legal practice.