Caroline Hearn

The SDT’s decision in SRA v Abhishek Kumar may be the first identified case worldwide in which misconduct involving AI-generated false authorities has resulted in removal from a professional register. But career-ending sanctions remain exceptional – and while it is clear that verification of your AI work product remains important – what you do next if mistakes are made may be more important still. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal’s decision in SRA v Abhishek Kumar is eye-catching.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) working group chaired by Lord Justice Birss has published an update on responses to its consultation on the use of AI in the preparation of court documents. While the final report is not expected until later in 2026, the initial analysis provides an early indication of where the debate may be heading.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its interim report on the use of AI for preparing court documents, as it invites input into new proposals on the governance of the use of AI tools in this context. The report from the council - which advises the Lord Chancellor, the judiciary and the Civil Procedure Rules Committee on civil procedure matters - comes as countries around the world introduce their own guidance and restrictions on best AI practice.