UK lawyers divided on AI regulation

Reading time: one minute

UK lawyers are divided on the question of who should regulate AI usage in the workspace, according to a report by Thomson Reuters.

The Thomson Reuters Institute conducted almost 250 interviews with UK legal professionals and found that 48% of lawyers in UK firms and 50% of in-house lawyers advocate for self-regulation of AI in the legal profession. Meanwhile, 36% of firm-based lawyers and 44% of in-house lawyers prefer government oversight of AI regulation.  

According to the report, the main barriers preventing UK lawyers from adopting generative AI in their work are concerns about inaccurate responses (74%), data security worries (68%), and the challenge of complying with relevant laws and regulations (63%). Among lawyers already using generative AI, common applications of the technology include document review, legal research and document summarisation.

Lawyers in the US and Canada seem more wary, with only 26% agreeing that government should oversee the regulation of AI. While the US has active generative AI regulation efforts at both federal and state levels, much of the guidance is still in the early phases.

The chief product officer for legal tech at Thomson Reuters, Kriti Sharma, emphasised the importance of regulation in “instilling the trust needed to achieve widespread adoption of AI solutions”. Sharma also commended firms for self-regulating by "investing in AI skills training, and setting robust guidelines, so they can start harnessing its benefits now while also ensuring its safe use”.