In the news
Small firms eager to adopt new tech – but face barriers
While the majority of small firms and sole practitioners agree that technology will help the sector provide better value to consumers (82%), only 4% feel there are no barriers to adopting it.
Firms say challenges include cost, concerns around data compliance risks and unreliable technology. Some describe a ‘wild west’ of options to choose from to meet their technology needs. A fifth want greater transparency of pricing models to support future adoption.
The research, published by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), also found that AI is a newer trend for sole practitioners and small firms, reflected in moderate adoption rates (14%). These firms are keen to engage with AI but need more information to embrace it safely.
Read the research on sole practitioners’ and small firms’ use of technology and innovation
One in three say yes to robot lawyer representation – for a cut price
A poll of more than 4,000 people across the UK and US found that 30% of respondents would allow a robot lawyer – that is, an AI system acting alone – to represent them in a legal matter. However, price plays a part, and when asked what would encourage people to use AI in legal services, 47% of respondents said a lower cost. The poll also asked what areas of law people would be most comfortable outsourcing to AI. Many were comfortable with using it for administrative issues such as challenging a parking ticket, but fewer said it was suitable for more complex matters, such as divorce and criminal defence.
Opportunities for barristers looking to adopt AI
There is a growing recognition of the opportunities to streamline various aspects of barristers’ workflows. Research from the Bar Standards Board (BSB) found: ‘tasks like time and billing, client onboarding, completing compliance questionnaires from law firms, evidence review, and creating chronologies are areas where barristers acknowledged that technology could significantly enhance efficiency.’ However, the structure of the profession, providers’ limited marketing to the Bar, and investment are some of the challenges barristers face when looking at integrating new technology. The study recommends the BSB and others take action to support technology awareness and reduce the uncertainty in using it.
SRA gives green light to first AI-driven law firm
The SRA has approved Garfield.Law Ltd to provide regulated legal services purely through AI. The firm will offer small and medium-sized businesses the use of an AI-powered litigation assistant to help them recover unpaid debts. Before authorising the firm, the SRA says it engaged with the owners to make sure it could meet its rules, seeking reassurance around quality checking work, client confidentiality and safeguarding against conflicts of interest. The regulator also checked the firm is managing the risk of 'AI hallucinations.' The system will not be able to propose relevant case law, which is a high-risk area for large language model machine learning.
Increase in law firms using generative AI
The percentage of law firms using generative AI (genAI) technology has increased by 12 percentage points – from 14% in 2024 to 26% in 2025. A report on the use of genAI in professional services by Thomson Reuters also found that 46% of law and tax firms expect client rates will stay the same, even with integrated genAI technology. This is a decrease of seven percentage points compared to 2024 (53%). Almost one in three tax and law firm respondents think rates will increase somewhat (27%). And, two in five respondents (40%) said they expect the use of alternative fee arrangements to increase as a result of genAI.
Lawyers reliant on fake cases narrowly avoid contempt proceedings
The High Court will not be initiating contempt of court proceedings in relation to two cases where a solicitor and a barrister relied on case law in their submissions which turned out to be fake. In both instances, there was ‘actual or suspected use’ of genAI tools. The High Court is not taking any further action as, in one of the cases, the threshold for the initiation on contempt proceedings was not met. In the other, there were a number of reasons, including that the barrister involved was an ‘extremely junior lawyer’.
The judgment comments that although AI ‘is a powerful technology’ and ‘can be a useful tool in litigation,’ the facts of these cases: ‘raise broader areas of concern… as to the adequacy of the training, supervision and regulation of those who practice before the courts.’ It highlighted that where work is conducted on a solicitor’s behalf by others: ‘the solicitor remains accountable for the work.’ Both lawyers have been referred to their regulators.
Judicial guidance update notes availability of Copilot
A revised version of guidance for judicial office holders on AI includes definitions of the terms ‘hallucination’ and ‘AI agent’. It also has tips on how to spot submissions produced by AI. The list includes references to cases that do not sound familiar or have unfamiliar citations and submissions that use American spelling or refer to overseas cases. The updated guidance also points readers in the direction of Microsoft’s Copilot, a genAI chatbot, and says the tool is now available on judicial office holders’ devices.