header-logo header-logo

07 January 2026
Issue: 8144 / Categories: Legal News , Artificial intelligence , Technology , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Existing framework sufficient to regulate AI, says Law Society

There’s no need to change the rules or introduce more legislation to regulate the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the legal sector, the Law Society has said this week in its response to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology’s call for evidence on the AI Growth Lab

The Lab is a government-run cross-economy sandbox for testing AI use in regulated sectors.

Law Society CEO, Ian Jeffery said: ‘The existing legal regulatory framework supports progress. The main challenges don’t stem from regulatory burdens, but rather from uncertainty, cost, data and skills associated with AI adoption. Technological progress in the legal sector should not expose clients or consumers to unregulated risks.’ 

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Jurit LLP—Caroline Williams

Private wealth and tax team welcomes cross-border specialist as consultant

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

Freeths—Michelle Kirkland Elias

International hospitality and leisure specialist joins corporate team as partner

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Flint Bishop—Deborah Niven

Firm appoints head of intellectual property to drive northern growth

NEWS
Talk of a reserved ‘Welsh seat’ on the Supreme Court is misplaced. In NLJ this week, Professor Graham Zellick KC explains that the Constitutional Reform Act treats ‘England and Wales’ as one jurisdiction, with no statutory Welsh slot
The government’s plan to curb jury trials has sparked ‘jury furore’. Writing in NLJ this week, David Locke, partner at Hill Dickinson, says the rationale is ‘grossly inadequate’
A year after the $1.5bn Bybit heist, crypto fraud is booming—but so is recovery. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Holloway, founder and CEO of M2 Recovery, warns that scams hit at least $14bn in 2025, fuelled by ‘pig butchering’ cons and AI deepfakes
After Woodcock confirmed no general duty to warn, debate turns to the criminal law. Writing in NLJ this week, Charles Davey of The Barrister Group urges revival of misprision or a modern equivalent
Family courts are tightening control of expert evidence. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Chris Pamplin says there is ‘no automatic right’ to call experts; attendance must be ‘necessary in the interests of justice’ under FPR Pt 25
back-to-top-scroll