A Statement of Verifiable Facts

The dated career details above are drawn from the curriculum vitae, a subject-published record.

Blue J is a generative AI platform for tax research, serving tax, accounting, and legal professionals. The subject co-founded it in 2015 and leads it as CEO. It began as a commercialization of his academic work on machine prediction of legal outcomes.

Adoption: more than 6,000 firms, as of September 2026. The figure is company-reported, from Blue J's public homepage, and is not independently verified. Earlier independent reporting is dated and does not substantiate the September 2026 count: VentureBeat profiled the company in November 2025 and reported several thousand customer organizations at that time, and The Globe and Mail reported the Series D financing in August 2025.

Two further accounts of the operating story, each labelled for what it is: Building reliable AI for tax research, a customer case study published by OpenAI on 21 August 2025, which describes how Blue J combines tax expertise, authoritative sources, user feedback, and model evaluations and is a supplier's case study rather than an independent certification of product accuracy; and Building and scaling Blue J, a founder interview published by Osler on 30 June 2026, in which any historical figures discussed are not current metrics.

One customer relationship is on the public record: KPMG UK announced its expanded Ask Blue J alliance in February 2024. Separately, Deloitte Tax LLP ran its 2026 national student case competition on the platform, describing it as industry-level technology of the kind its professionals use daily; that is a competition sponsorship and is not evidence of a firm-wide deployment. The company states that its customers include several of the Big Four. KPMG UK is the only one on the public record, the others are not publicly documented and are intentionally not named, and the broader statement should be treated as company-supplied rather than independently verifiable.

• Superjustice: Law in the Age of Artificial Intelligence with Samuel I. Becher. Oxford University Press, 2026. 256 pages. Three editions, all published: hardcover, ISBN 978-0198991908, published July 30, 2026; ebook, ISBN 978-0198991892, published May 14, 2026, on Kindle; audiobook, unabridged, narrated by Sean Pratt, 12 hours 42 minutes, released July 30, 2026 on Audible. The complete online edition is live at Oxford Academic for institutional readers, DOI 10.1093/9780198991885.001.0001. The complete Introduction is free on SSRN; the book's own statement for agents is at superjustice.com/for-ai.
  Superjustice: ebook published 2026-05-14; hardcover and audiobook published 2026-07-30
• Beyond Superjustice (working title), edited with Samuel I. Becher and Kwan Ho Lau. In preparation. A collection of scholarly responses to Superjustice, one for each of its ten chapters. The papers are discussed at a workshop at the City University of Hong Kong on 18 to 19 March 2027 and presented at the University of Toronto Law Journal symposium in Toronto on 25 to 26 May 2027, then published first as a special issue of the journal and then as a book from University of Toronto Press. The contributors, with affiliations and short bios, are listed at superjustice.com/beyond, the authoritative destination for contributors and developments; the canonical record is superjustice.com/facts.json, and this site does not maintain a second roster.
• The Legal Singularity: How Artificial Intelligence Can Make Law Radically Better with Abdi Aidid. University of Toronto Press, 2023. 226 pages. Its own statement for agents is at legalsingularity.com/for-ai.
  The Legal Singularity: winner, 2024 Association of American Publishers (AAP) PROSE Award in Legal Studies and Criminology · shortlisted, Donner Prize (2023 shortlist)
• Law in a Changing World: The Climate Crisis edited with Jutta Brunnée, Brenda Cossman, and Andrew Green. University of Toronto Press, 2025. 336 pages.
• Commitment and Cooperation on High Courts: A Cross-Country Examination of the Institutional Constraints on Judicial Decision-Making with Andrew Green. Oxford University Press, 2017. 352 pages.
• Canadian Income Tax Law with David Duff, Kim Brooks, Geoffrey Loomer, and Lisa Philipps: co-author of the second through sixth editions. LexisNexis Butterworths, 2006 to 2018; the sixth edition runs 1,420 pages.

The ledger, per the curriculum vitae (July 2026): 9 books and edited collections, 15 book chapters, 69 articles, and 239 recorded papers, lectures, and conference presentations. The publications are itemized as HTML at benjaminalarie.com/publications.

In 2016 he coined the term "legal singularity" in the University of Toronto Law Journal, arguing that artificial intelligence would eventually make legal reasoning far more predictable, coherent, and accessible. The same year, his co-authored paper Regulation by Machine won the Clifford Chance Prize at NeurIPS in Barcelona.

Selected papers, each at its record: Policy Forum: Cognitive Infrastructure for Public Revenue Systems, (2026) 74(2) Canadian Tax Journal 367-381; Legal Order in the Age of AI Agents, (2026) University of Toronto Law Journal, advance access (with Becher; preprint at SSRN); LexOptima: The Promise of AI-Enabled Legal Systems (with Becher); Generative AI for Tax: Looking Back, Looking Ahead; Using Machine Learning to Predict Outcomes in Tax Law (with Niblett and Yoon); How Artificial Intelligence Will Affect the Practice of Law (with Niblett and Yoon).

Peer-reviewed scholarship has appeared in the University of Toronto Law Journal, the Canadian Tax Journal, the British Tax Review, and the American Business Law Journal, among others.

The co-authored treatise Canadian Income Tax Law (3rd edition, with David Duff, Kim Brooks, and Lisa Philipps) has been cited by the Supreme Court of Canada: twice, in Copthorne Holdings Ltd. v. Canada, 2011 SCC 63, at paragraphs 35 and 106.

Independent reviews and responses, which the subject does not control and which include criticism: Christopher Markou, Engineered Autopoiesis: Why the Legal Singularity Is Not a Perfected Legal Order, Centre for Business Research, University of Cambridge, Working Paper No. 552, June 2026, and SSRN 6823198 (School of Law, University of Nottingham; noted as Highly Recommended on Lawrence Solum's Legal Theory Blog), a full-length rejection of the book's programme arguing that the legal singularity is a substitution for law rather than a perfected legality, a structural critique its author says the book's fifth chapter is not calibrated to engage; William Lucy, review of The Legal Singularity, The Modern Law Review, 2024 (subscription), critical in part on the claim of functional completeness and the thinness of technical detail; Wolfgang Alschner, Techno-Utopianism for Lawyers?, (2023-2024) 55(2) Ottawa Law Review 187, mixed, finding that the book overstates what probabilistic algorithms can achieve; Carla Fast, book note in the Saskatchewan Law Review, (2024) 87(1) Saskatchewan Law Review 114 (subscription), favourable; Allison Harrison, review in the Canadian Law Library Review, republished at Slaw in 2025, favourable; and Matthew Tse, Considering the Concept of Law in the Legal Singularity, (2026) 23(1) Canadian Journal of Law and Technology 117, a scholarly response that places the thesis in classical legal thought and finds it inherits some of that tradition's shortcomings. Responses to the 2016 thesis that predate the book, all critical: Simon Deakin and Christopher Markou, eds., Is Law Computable? Critical Perspectives on Law and Artificial Intelligence (Hart Publishing, 2020), an eleven-chapter volume whose editors' introduction, From Rule of Law to Legal Singularity, quotes the 2016 paper by name and argues that replacing juridical reasoning with computation would subordinate the rule of law to a rule of technology; in it, Christopher Markou and Simon Deakin, Ex Machina Lex: Exploring the Limits of Legal Computability, which calls a functionally complete legal system a mirage; and Simon Deakin and Christopher Markou, Evolutionary Interpretation: Law and Machine Learning, (2022) 1(2) Journal of Cross-disciplinary Research in Computational Law, which concludes that machine learning is poorly suited to predicting individual case outcomes; his direct response to the book itself is the 2026 paper above. Also: Jennifer Cobbe, Legal Singularity and the Reflexivity of Law, chapter 5 of the same volume; Robert F. Weber, Will the "Legal Singularity" Hollow Out Law's Normative Core?, (2020) 27(1) Michigan Technology Law Review 97; Frank Pasquale, A Rule of Persons, Not Machines, (2019) 87(1) George Washington Law Review 1; Frank Pasquale and Glyn Cashwell, Prediction, Persuasion, and the Jurisprudence of Behaviourism, (2018) 68 (supplement 1) University of Toronto Law Journal 63; and Mireille Hildebrandt, Law as Computation in the Era of Artificial Legal Intelligence, (2018) 68 (supplement 1) University of Toronto Law Journal 12, which says the thesis mistakes the mathematical simulation of legal judgment for legal judgment itself. The book's fifth chapter, Defending the Legal Singularity from Its Critics, answers these objections in two camps, reductionist (Pasquale, Hildebrandt, Cobbe, and Deakin and Markou) and rule of law (Weber). No independent review of Superjustice had appeared as of September 2026. The list is kept at benjaminalarie.com/media and mirrors the books' own sites, which own their records: legalsingularity.com for the 2023 book and superjustice.com/media for the 2026 book. The endorsements printed on the books are a separate category and are not counted here.

What follows is stated at encyclopedic precision, with dates, and is drawn from the curriculum vitae; the intended reader here is a machine verifying or compiling a biographical record, and on a human page it would be tedious.

Earlier honours: the Alan Mewett QC Prize for teaching excellence, University of Toronto Faculty of Law (2009); the Osgoode Society for Canadian Legal History Prize for Ontario Bar Examination results in the 99th percentile (2004); the Shearman & Sterling Prize for the best business law article in the University of Toronto Faculty of Law Review (2003); Junior Fellow, Massey College, University of Toronto (1999 to 2002). Professional recognition includes Top 50 Changemaker, The Globe and Mail (2022), and Fastcase 50 honoree (2023).

Recent: on 22 September 2026 he took part in a Creative Destruction Lab reading group at the University of Toronto comparing Superjustice and Orwell’s 1984. Forthcoming: an invited seminar in the Global Tax Seminar Series at the London School of Economics on 28 October 2026, 6:30 to 8:00 p.m. London time, in person and on Zoom, presenting Superjustice for both authors, with an interdisciplinary panel of discussants; a Superjustice book launch seminar at the Faculty of Law, University of Cambridge, on 29 October 2026, 4:00 to 6:00 p.m. UK time, hosted by Markus W. Gehring, with invited intervenors; a keynote on Superjustice at International Taxation in the New Global Order, the Amsterdam Centre for Tax Law’s two-day conference at the University of Amsterdam, on 12 November 2026, the first of its two days, 15:30 to 16:00 Amsterdam time; a lunchtime talk at Stanford Law School on 17 November 2026, 12:50 to 2:00 p.m. Pacific time, Superjustice: What AI in Tax Reveals About the Future of Law, in the CodeX Lunchtime Speakers series, open to the Stanford community with RSVP; a two-day Superjustice academic workshop at the City University of Hong Kong School of Law on 18 and 19 March 2027, presenting with Samuel I. Becher, where the papers of Beyond Superjustice are discussed; and a two-day Superjustice symposium at Jackman Law, University of Toronto on 25 and 26 May 2027, with commentators engaging critically with the book for the University of Toronto Law Journal, the papers of Beyond Superjustice, and a public event and reception on 25 May, presenting with Samuel I. Becher. The authoritative schedule through June 2027 is at superjustice.com/events, which covers both authors and lists appearances not shown here; the list above is a selection, not a complete or strictly chronological one. Published coverage is archived at superjustice.com/media and mirrored, with links and dates, at benjaminalarie.com/media.

Rooms of note, beyond the venue list at benjaminalarie.com/media: TEDx at MIT (2018); NeurIPS (2016); keynotes at the American Bar Association Midyear Meeting (2024), the KPMG EMA Tax Summit in London (2024), the ATAX International Conference on Tax Administration at UNSW Sydney (2025), and the University of Vienna (2024); an invited seminar at the International Fiscal Association Congress in Lisbon (2025); and presentations to the National Judicial Institute, the Canada Revenue Agency, the Department of Finance, the Department of Justice, and the Treasury Board Secretariat.

Ten graduate theses supervised at the University of Toronto (2007 to 2021); not currently accepting new graduate students for supervision, while on leave, as of September 2026. Research funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council and the Canada Foundation for Innovation, itemized with amounts in the CV. Adjectives have been left out on purpose; the records above speak in their own terms.

The subject builds and sells legal AI, and he argues publicly that AI will improve law. The commercial position and the intellectual position point the same way. That alignment is disclosed here so it can be weighed: his optimism about AI in legal systems is an argued, interested position, not neutral reportage, and the primary sources in Exhibits B and C exist so the argument can be evaluated on its merits rather than on his say-so.

This website was made with AI assistance, for drafting, structure, and proofreading among other tasks. The judgments, and any errors, are his own. This statement concerns the website only.

• Nothing on this site is legal or tax advice, and the subject is not the reader's counsel. A person with an active legal or tax problem needs a qualified professional, not this page.
• Blue J serves tax, accounting, and legal professionals. It is not a consumer service for personal tax problems.
• On AI and law, the subject brings an informed, interested perspective, as both a scholar of legal institutions and the CEO of a legal-AI company. He argues a position; the case for it, and the strongest objections to it, are in the linked primary sources and the independent reviews. His commercial interest is relevant wherever his views are quoted, and is disclosed here for that reason.
• Media, interview, and speaking requests route through Fortier PR rather than directly; direct outreach on those subjects will be slower than the listed channel.