header-logo header-logo

Double trouble or twice as nice?

21 March 2025 / Bamdad Shams
Issue: 8109 / Categories: Features , Profession , Artificial intelligence
printer mail-detail
211928
How can businesses reconcile the differing approaches to AI regulation on either side of the Channel? Bamdad Shams sets out some practical strategies for legal advisers
  • Artificial intelligence (AI) regulation is increasingly in the spotlight in the legal world as the EU and UK diverge.

The transformative power of artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping industries and human-societal interactions, but its rapid adoption also brings significant governance, accountability, and compliance challenges.

The EU and the UK have each taken a distinct approach to regulating AI systems, with the EU’s AI Act employing a structured, risk-based model, and the UK relying on a more flexible and principles-driven framework. These regulatory differences present practical challenges for businesses and their advisers, underscoring the crucial role of legal practitioners in navigating these complex landscapes.

The EU: a comprehensive framework

The EU Artificial Intelligence Act (the AI Act), a pioneering regulatory effort globally, categorises AI systems into four risk levels—minimal, limited, high, and unacceptable—each with specific compliance obligations. Legal practitioners handling cross-border matters must understand

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Slater Heelis—Chester office

Slater Heelis—Chester office

North West presence strengthened with Chester office launch

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Cooke, Young & Keidan—Elizabeth Meade

Firm grows commercial disputes expertise with partner promotion

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

NEWS
The House of Lords has set up a select committee to examine assisted dying, which will delay the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
back-to-top-scroll