Can solicitors use AI?

The short answer

Solicitors may use AI for research, drafting and review in the same way they may use any other tool or delegate work to a junior colleague. What changes is not permission but responsibility: the solicitor and the firm remain accountable for the work, and must be able to show they supervised and checked it.

This guide is general information about the regulatory position, not legal advice. Read the SRA’s own guidance and take advice on your firm’s circumstances.

What the SRA says

• The SRA regulates firms and solicitors, not AI vendors. Its research on AI in the legal market says firms stay accountable for the outputs of the tools they use, and that client protection runs through the firm.
• Supervision covers AI-assisted work. The SRA’s guidance on effective supervision was updated on 12 June 2026 to cover AI: human review, scrutiny and professional judgement, with the authorised individual keeping ultimate responsibility.
• Misuse is a conduct issue. On 17 August 2026 the SRA published a warning notice on the misuse of AI, focused on false citations and client confidentiality, and made clear that reliance on AI output is no defence. It reported 42 related reports between July 2025 and July 2026.

Courts, the Law Society and the Bar Council

In Ayinde and Al-Haroun [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin), the Divisional Court said lawyers using AI for research must check it against authoritative sources, that the duty extends to relying on others’ AI-assisted work, and that those with leadership responsibility must take practical steps to make sure lawyers understand their duties.

The judiciary refreshed its own AI guidance for judicial office holders on 31 October 2025, warning against entering confidential information into public tools and flagging the risk of invented material. The Law Society’s generative AI guidance says professional duties apply whatever tool is used, and the Bar Council updated its guidance for barristers in November 2025, including tools built for lawyers.

What this means in practice

• Choose tools you can check. Prefer tools that show their sources and their steps, so verification is quick and can be evidenced.
• Verify every authority before it goes into advice or a filing. Our citation checklist sets out the steps.
• Protect confidentiality. Know where client data goes, which providers process it and whether they store or train on it. Share only what the task needs.
• Keep a human decision on every change. Edits to client documents should be reviewed and approved, not applied automatically.
• Write it down. A short firm policy on approved tools, permitted uses and checking steps makes supervision demonstrable.
• Be clear with clients about how you use technology where it matters to them.

Reserved activities and what tools may not do

The Legal Services Act 2007 reserves certain activities, such as conducting litigation and rights of audience, to authorised persons. A research and drafting tool does not carry out reserved activities and cannot take responsibility for them. The professional obligations stay with you.

How Consilena fits a supervised workflow

Consilena is a research and drafting tool, not a law firm. It is built around the checks regulators expect: a work trace of every search and read, citations that open the provision with its status and date, and edits that arrive as tracked changes for you to accept or reject. Its servers, databases, files and backups are hosted on AWS in Frankfurt; questions go to US-based AI model providers with data collection denied. The security page sets out the detail.