A legal charity has said there is a “potential role” for AI tools in meeting the needs of the justice system, following a survey which found one in six participants facing a legal dispute used a generative AI chatbot.
Research led by legal reform charity Justice examined how AI is affecting the current justice system in the UK with a large-scale study of public use of AI chatbots for legal help between December 2025 and January 2026.
Out of the 3,287 survey participants – nationally representative by age, gender, and ethnicity – almost half reported a legal dispute in the last two years.
Age ranges determined the extent of chatbot use, with 26% of the youngest participants (aged 18 to 24) having reported using the technology, in comparison with 10% of the older participants (aged 55 to 64).
Of the chatbot users in the sample, only 6% used the AI tool alone and on average drew on 3.7 sources in comparison with those that did not use an AI tool (1.9 sources).
Chatbot users were less likely than others to have sought the advice of a solicitor for their legal dispute (33.9% of chatbot users versus 44.6% of non-users) however were somewhat more likely to have gone to Citizens Advice or a legal advice helpline.
The survey uncovered that many consumers use the technology to navigate “common and stressful” problems that fall outside the scope of legal aid, as well as for simplifying legal terms and providing second opinions on legal advice given by lawyers.
Among them, around one in six participants said they had used an AI chatbot for “help, information, or advice” in relation to their legal issue.
Around one third of those who used an AI chatbot for legal information agreed to provide screenshots anonymously of their conversations. The conversations suggested people were turning to AI chatbots for problems that are “common, stressful, and often difficult to navigate without advice, but that largely fall outside the scope of legal aid”.
Among common consumer disputes were housing and landlord-tenant issues, employment disputes, family law, medical negligence, debt collection, insurance disputes and court procedures.
The most widespread use of the technology was for direct questions over legal rights and options, the survey found.
Questions were asked about consumer law, tenancy deposits, or unfair dismissal. Participants also asked about processes: what to expect from court, how to prepare, and where to take a complaint.
When asking for explanations of legal concepts, several participants took the opportunity to specify in prompts that they wanted the answer in simple terms and not in legal speak.
Meanwhile some participants, already with legal representation, wanted to query the service they were receiving from their lawyers.
Other uses for the chatbot, the survey found, included drafting, editing and improving templates for emails involving legal disputes.
In stressful situations, participants used AI to prepare for difficult conversations, with one participant requesting a “script for me to say on the phone”.
Beyond legal advice, many conversations revealed users looking for emotional support.
This raises questions, the charity says, around AI chatbots being trained to be more friendly and validating, with evidence suggesting “it makes them more likely to make mistakes and reinforce false beliefs”.
The report, What AI Chatbots Can Teach Us About Unmet Legal Needs, concluded: “Our findings suggest that people are not just using AI for legal information.
“Chatbots are helping people understand unfamiliar language, navigate emotionally difficult situations, and communicate more effectively during legal disputes. This wider support is central to people’s experience of the justice system yet is often difficult to obtain through existing legal support.
“Our findings also suggest that chatbots are supplementing other sources of help rather than replacing them.”
The report drew on conclusions that people using AI tools already have the digital means to get support, meanwhile for those digitally excluded and whose needs are “most likely to go unmet”, this problem may become more acute.
Demographic data from the survey further found that “those with unmet legal needs who are women, older or unemployed are not benefiting equally from this technology” and the justice gap for them may be “widening, not closing” with the advent of these new technologies.
“There is a potential role for AI tools in meeting needs the justice system has long struggled to address,” the report said.
