Hallucinations and client confidentiality are two major concerns cited by the Solicitors Regulation Authority in a new Misuse of AI warning notice issued by the regulator.
Acknowledging the increased use of AI across the legal sector in the support of tasks such as research, drafting, document review and administrative processes, the SRA’s executive director of strategy and policy Aileen Armstrong warned the technology “does not change the professional standards expected of solicitors and law firms”.
Although the SRA acknowledges many firms are using AI safely and responsibly, recent cases have highlighted the importance of ensuring appropriate human oversight and governance arrangements, it said.
In Harber v HMRC [2023], a UK tribunal found that a self-represented litigant had relied on case authorities that did not exist, despite appearing superficially authentic. The SRA says there have also been several instances of solicitors self-reporting where they have relied on AI tools that have generated inaccurate or misleading content.
“Firms and solicitors must have appropriate oversight and controls in place to make sure consumers are receiving high-quality legal services and that our standards are met”, Armstrong said. “Individuals remain responsible for the work they produce and the advice they provide, regardless of whether AI is used, or not.”
The SRA received 42 reports related to the potential misuse of AI between July 2025 and July 2026, with several investigations ongoing, including into issues relating to inaccurate legal citations, supervision and confidentiality.
The use of AI also presents a data protection risk, the SRA warns, with confidential client information being entered into AI tools that lack appropriate safeguards, risking potential breaches of confidentiality and wider data protection requirements.
In UK v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2026] UKUT 81 (IAC), the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) raised concerns about the use of AI in case preparation, the warning notice points out.
“While the primary focus of the decision was on the submission of inaccurate, AI-generated legal authorities, the Tribunal also made broader observations about client confidentiality and the potential impact on legal professional privilege. The Tribunal observed at paragraph 21 that ‘to put client letters and decision letters from the Home Office into an open source AI tool, such as ChatGPT, is to place this information on the internet in the public domain’.
“Using AI tools in this way will likely breach client confidentiality and as a result, legal professional privilege may be permanently waived and unable to be recovered.”
Responding to the notice, the Law Society of England and Wales said the legal profession will continue to need timely and clear guidance on how to respond to emerging technologies.
Brett Dixon, vice president, said: “The Law Society recognises that AI should be used to support and enhance legal practice, not to replace the essential role of solicitors in providing trusted advice to clients.
“We welcome the SRA’s warning notice and the clarity the guidance provides around how the use of AI interacts with the provision of legal services by solicitors, particularly in relation to the courts and the protection of client confidentiality.
“As a regulated profession, solicitors have the responsibility to act in the best interests of their client, which includes using AI and other technologies responsibly. The warning notice is a reminder of how this should be applied in practice.
“Technological innovation in legal processes and service delivery is advancing at speed. As the use of AI evolves rapidly, the SRA will need to continue providing the profession with swift and clear guidance so solicitors can use AI with confidence in line with their duties.
“We look forward to continuing our engagement with the SRA to help solicitors navigate this everchanging landscape.”
In the meantime, solicitors’ existing professional obligations continue to apply regardless of the tools used within practice, the SRA warns.
“You remain responsible for the advice and outputs you provide to clients as a legal professional.
“Using AI tools in the course of your work does not reduce, remove or replace the professional, regulatory or legal responsibility you have for the quality and accuracy of service and information delivered to your clients, the court, third parties or your regulators.”
