Galleo

Introduction

In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) is being woven into nearly every professional workflow, the UK legal sector is cautiously but undeniably moving forward. From document review and due diligence to risk assessment and research, AI is already reshaping how law firms deliver services.

But how are legal regulators responding?

Unlike some jurisdictions that have rushed to legislate, the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) in the UK has opted for a principle-based, technology-neutral approach. While they haven’t yet issued binding rules specific to AI, the message is clear: solicitors remain fully responsible for the work they produce, regardless of whether it came from a human or a machine.

This article examines the SRA’s evolving guidance, explores what UK solicitors should consider when integrating AI into their practice, and previews the likely direction of regulation in the years ahead.

What the SRA Has Said So Far

In 2023 and 2024, the SRA made a series of public statements addressing AI in legal practice. These were complemented by the UK government’s pro-innovation AI white paper and the Law Society of England and Wales’ guidance.

Key takeaways from the SRA’s position include:

Regulations are technology-neutral.
The SRA doesn’t intend to create “AI-specific” rules—but expects existing regulatory principles (integrity, confidentiality, supervision, client care) to apply just the same.
Firms must assess risks and build internal controls.
Law firms are expected to carry out risk assessments before deploying AI and ensure proper oversight frameworks are in place.
Accountability remains with the solicitor.
Whether work is done by a junior, a contractor, or an algorithm, responsibility cannot be outsourced.
Transparency matters.
Clients should be informed if AI significantly impacts the services they receive, especially where automated decisions are involved.
The use of AI may trigger professional indemnity insurance (PII) considerations.
If AI causes harm due to misapplication or error, the solicitor—and their insurer—are on the hook.

Practical Applications — What UK Firms Are Actually Doing

While BigLaw and Magic Circle firms often pilot advanced tools internally, AI adoption is also gaining traction among smaller firms, particularly in:

Contract generation platforms
AI-assisted research
Automated template review
Digital onboarding and client triage

The legal obligation? Even with cutting-edge tools, lawyers must:

Review AI-generated output before submission
Disclose material use of automation where appropriate
Maintain control over the service process

The practical risk? Relying too heavily on AI without proper safeguards could result in SRA scrutiny, complaints to the Legal Ombudsman, or even negligence claims.

A Case in Point: Due Diligence Automation

Imagine a mid-sized UK firm using AI to process due diligence in an M&A transaction. The tool flags red-flag clauses and compiles a risk summary.

Ethical and professional questions include:

Has a solicitor reviewed the AI’s findings before submission?
Were clients informed about the use of automated review?
If errors arise, can the firm show it had adequate supervision protocols?

The SRA’s position is that technology may assist—but judgment, supervision, and communication remain human responsibilities.

Why This Matters: A Moving Target with Growing Scrutiny

The SRA’s current stance offers firms flexibility—but that doesn’t mean firms are off the hook.

The Law Society of England and Wales has warned that firms should not wait for binding rules to act.
As client awareness of AI increases, so too will scrutiny of how firms use it.
The UK’s AI regulation bill (still in development) is likely to introduce sector-specific risk frameworks, particularly for professional services.

This is the moment for law firms to get their internal houses in order.

Our View: AI Is Not a Short-Term Trend—It’s a Foundational Shift

This isn’t just the next tech tool. AI is changing the nature of legal work.

It’s helping firms:

Reduce drafting time
Standardise documents at scale
Automate first-level reviews
Offer faster, cheaper service models to clients

But that same power means greater responsibility.

Firms that treat AI as an afterthought—or deploy it without training and supervision—risk falling afoul of client expectations, SRA oversight, and the broader market.

Final Thoughts: Now Is the Time for Proactive Governance

The SRA has not yet cracked down on AI use—but it’s watching.

Now is the time for firms to:

Implement internal policies on acceptable AI use
Train staff on risks, benefits, and red flags
Choose tools that offer privacy, transparency, and auditability
Create systems of oversight that meet the spirit of the Code of Conduct

In a fast-moving field, regulators prefer firms that anticipate risks over those who respond to crises. Smart firms will treat this moment as an opportunity—not just to modernise, but to lead.

How the UK’s Solicitors Regulation Authority Views AI in Legal Practice