The Law Society of England and Wales has launched a new practical guide to help solicitors make safer, more informed technology decisions and warns that unsafe AI adoption may expose firms to risks.
The majority of firms and solicitors now use AI for routine legal practice tasks such as drafting documents and analysing case material, the Law Society said, noting that while the technology may offer significant benefits it also comes with “great risks” that require ongoing human oversight.
“Challenges to data protection are heightened,” the organisation said. “The risk of unreliable and inaccurate outputs increases. AI tools are also notorious for having embedded biases.”
The Buying New Technology guide outlines clear practical steps on how to identify business needs, decide on the type of technology required, develop the brief, find different suppliers, negotiate contracts, embed the new tools and evaluate them.
Ian Jeffery, chief executive at the Law Society, said: “Our new guide helps firms ask the right questions, avoid common pitfalls and make informed decisions.
“The benefits of technology can be enormous, allowing more time to focus on original thinking and innovation. But the downside can be considerable if firms do not adopt new technologies, including AI, safely and responsibly to serve the people and communities they live in.”
The resource also provides downloadable templates to help firms strengthen their procurement processes and adopt technology efficiently and safely.
The release of the guide comes as the Law Society issued its response to the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce’s consultation update on AI liability and its new report on digital assets.
Welcoming the work of the taskforce and its “much-needed clarity” on how to address liability for harms cause by AI, Jeffery said:
“The taskforce affirms that AI has no legal personality, so solicitors and technology developers are the ones held responsible for any harms caused to people through the development and use of AI.”
However, the chief executive warned it needs to be easier to legally prove what caused AI harm and who should pay for it.
“Clearer guidance is needed on how professional standards evolve when AI tools are used by practitioners and how to manage systemic risks when AI is used in the justice system,” he explained.
“The Law Society will carry on providing the practical support needed to ensure the legal profession can innovate safely.”
The organisation said it welcomes the transparency introduced by the enforcement of the new Property (Digital Assets etc.) Act 2025, which officially recognised that digital assets, like cryptocurrencies, are considered personal property.
“The UK Jurisdiction Taskforce’s new report clarifies who has ‘control’ over digital assets,” Jeffery said.
“Using real-world examples to explain the law helps to better protect victims and property, ensuring that the UK remains a jurisdiction of choice for international digital disputes.
“We look forward to working with the taskforce to explore how providing further clarity on these two important policies creates a safer environment for people and businesses that can lead to more growth and jobs across the country.”
