header-logo header-logo

NLJ this week: AI in court—tool or trap?

224108
Writing in NLJ this week, Clare Hughes-Williams and Sam Kneebone, partners at DAC Beachcroft, warn that while artificial intelligence (AI) can boost efficiency, it also poses serious risks if misused

Recent UK and international cases show lawyers citing non-existent authorities generated by AI, leading to court sanctions and regulatory referrals. The authors stress that AI is not a substitute for human judgement and must be used with rigorous oversight. They recommend firms implement AI usage policies, compulsory training, and verification protocols.

Lawyers must always check AI-generated content against trusted sources before presenting it in court or to clients. The Solicitors Regulation Authority has already referred several practitioners for failing to do so.

The authors conclude that while AI offers cost savings and access to justice, it lacks empathy and experience—qualities only human lawyers can provide. Used wisely, AI is a powerful tool; used blindly, it’s a liability.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Freeths—Ruth Clare

Freeths—Ruth Clare

National real estate team bolstered by partner hire in Manchester

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Farrer & Co—Claire Gordon

Partner appointed head of family team

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

mfg Solicitors—Neil Harrison

Firm strengthens agriculture and rural affairs team with partner return

NEWS
Conveyancing lawyers have enjoyed a rapid win after campaigning against UK Finance’s decision to charge for access to the Mortgage Lenders’ Handbook
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) has launched a recruitment drive for talented early career and more senior barristers and solicitors
Regulators differed in the clarity and consistency of their post-Mazur advice and guidance, according to an interim report by the Legal Services Board (LSB)
The Solicitors Act 1974 may still underpin legal regulation, but its age is increasingly showing. Writing in NLJ this week, Victoria Morrison-Hughes of the Association of Costs Lawyers argues that the Act is ‘out of step with modern consumer law’ and actively deters fairness
A Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) ruling has reopened debate on the availability of ‘user damages’ in competition claims. Writing in NLJ this week, Edward Nyman of Hausfeld explains how the CAT allowed Dr Liza Lovdahl Gormsen’s alternative damages case against Meta to proceed, rejecting arguments that such damages are barred in competition law
back-to-top-scroll