The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has told UK solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not remove their legal responsibility, after identifying two problem areas: hallucinated case law in court submissions and confidential client data entered into public AI tools. The regulator says those failures produce bad outcomes for clients, slow case progression and damage public trust in the profession.
"We are concerned that some of those operating in the regulated sector are not fulfilling their obligations to uphold their duties to the courts, clients and third parties, and are not always following all relevant rules and regulations," the SRA said in its warning notice.
The regulator takes an outcomes-based approach. Hmm, so it sets the standard it expects of the profession but does not prescribe exactly how that standard should be met.
What the SRA has seen
The SRA says senior members of the judiciary have flagged potential breaches of its Code of Conduct. Solicitors have also self-reported cases where AI-generated content ended up in legal work and court submissions, including material that turned out to be untrue. Separately, the regulator has seen confidential client information pasted into publicly available AI tools, which creates data protection and client confidentiality issues.
"Appropriate human oversight, informed professional judgement and a proportionate, risk-based approach are essential," the notice says.
What the profession must do
The SRA's warning lists concrete expectations rather than prescribing a method for meeting them. Among them:
- Solicitors and regulated individuals remain accountable for AI output, no matter which tool produced it.
- Firms must put in place effective governance structures, systems and controls to manage AI risk.
- Anyone who puts AI-generated false material before a court could be held for contempt of court, and misleading the courts risks "serious consequences".
- Supervisors of junior or unauthorised colleagues can be held responsible if false citations from AI reach the court.
- Entering client information into a public AI tool is likely to breach client confidentiality, with free and paid tools both carrying risk. Client data should only be fed to AI systems when "appropriate contractual, technical and organisational safeguards" exist and the data stays inside a secure environment.
Law Society of England and Wales vice president Brett Dixon said solicitors have a duty to use AI and other technology responsibly and in the best interest of their clients. Legal teams looking for structured guidance can draw on resources such as AI for Legal and the AI Learning Path for Paralegals.
Why this matters for legal professionals
The lawyer who signs the document is the one responsible for its content, regardless of whether an AI tool generated it. A supervisor can be held liable for a false citation submitted by a junior member of the team. The practical steps are the same for any AI used in case work: check citations against a verifiable source, restrict which tools client data enters and confirm that confidentiality protections apply before anything is shared.
Your membership also unlocks:
