header-logo header-logo

17 June 2026
Issue: 8166 / Categories: Legal News , Artificial intelligence , Legal services , Regulatory
printer mail-detail

Regulator finds gaps in AI safeguards

The Legal Services Board (LSB) has highlighted a lack of safeguards where people use artificial intelligence (AI) tools to help with legal problems

Two LSB-commissioned research projects, published this week, highlight both AI’s potential and the regulatory gap. The first, ‘Existing standards for AI-powered business-to-consumer lawtech’, uncovered a dearth of standards for legal advice tools—almost all were designed for other purposes or were non-binding with no enforcement mechanism.

The second, ‘AI in legal services’, found consumers thought AI had potential but wanted five safeguards before using it: a minimum guarantee of accuracy, informed prior consent before any consequential action, human oversight at all times, access to redress for any harm caused, and user safety including protection of their personal information.

LSB chief executive Richard Orpin said: ‘What we found is a gap between what people reasonably expect and the protections currently in place.’

Law Society vice president Brett Dixon said AI could transform access to justice ‘but only if the right safeguards are in place’.

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll