Neurotechnology & the law: contract law

23 January 2026 / Harry Lambert , Dr Michelle Sharpe

Issue: 8146 / Categories: Features , Profession , Technology , Contract , Artificial intelligence , Regulatory

Harry Lambert & Dr Michelle Sharpe set out how neurotech presents new ways to evidence contractual consent, & new ways to erode it

Neurotech can both strengthen and undermine contractual consent. P300 attention signals may create auditable records showing which disclosures a user actually engaged with, but the same data can be used to manipulate consumers.
Undue influence and unconscionable conduct can capture neurotech-enabled exploitation, while statutory consumer protection regimes focus on trader behaviour, including manipulative design or inadequate oversight.
Current laws are often hard to enforce where harms are small and opaque, prompting calls for specialist regulators, guardrails, and auditable oversight in neurotech development.

Consumer neurotech devices that read and respond to brain and nerve activity are commercially available. A brain–computer interface (BCI) can be used to make purchases, confirm in-app transactions, and interact with online marketplaces. This has the potential to radically reshape how contracts are formed and enforced in the digital marketplace.

This article explores how neurotech

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

Neurotechnology & the law: contract law

Harry Lambert & Dr Michelle Sharpe set out how neurotech presents new ways to evidence contractual consent, & new ways to erode it

Neurotech can both strengthen and undermine contractual consent. P300 attention signals may create auditable records showing which disclosures a user actually engaged with, but the same data can be used to manipulate consumers.
Undue influence and unconscionable conduct can capture neurotech-enabled exploitation, while statutory consumer protection regimes focus on trader behaviour, including manipulative design or inadequate oversight.
Current laws are often hard to enforce where harms are small and opaque, prompting calls for specialist regulators, guardrails, and auditable oversight in neurotech development.

This article explores how neurotech

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

SourceURL:

Links:

E-newsletter Sign-Up

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Corporate governance and company law specialist joins the team

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

North west team expands with senior private client and property hires

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham

Firm boosts corporate team in Newcastle to support high-growth technology businesses

NEWS

Read All

NLJ this week: Police, contempt and the rule of law

Can a chief constable be held responsible for disobedient officers? Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth, professor of public law at De Montfort University, examines a Court of Appeal ruling that answers firmly: yes

NLJ this week: When your brain signs the contract

Neurotechnology is poised to transform contract law—and unsettle it. Writing in NLJ this week, Harry Lambert, barrister at Outer Temple Chambers and founder of the Centre for Neurotechnology & Law, and Dr Michelle Sharpe, barrister at the Victorian Bar, explore how brain–computer interfaces could both prove and undermine consent

NLJ this week: Comparators—how close is close enough?

Comparators remain the fault line of discrimination law. In this week's NLJ, Anjali Malik, partner at Bellevue Law, and Mukhtiar Singh, barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, review a bumper year of appellate guidance clarifying how tribunals should approach ‘actual’ and ‘evidential’ comparators. A new six-stage framework stresses a simple starting point: identify the treatment first

NLJ this week: Domicile—more than where you live

In cross-border divorces, domicile can decide everything. In NLJ this week, Jennifer Headon, legal director and head of international family, Isobel Inkley, solicitor, and Fiona Collins, trainee solicitor, all at Birketts LLP, unpack a Court of Appeal ruling that re-centres nuance in jurisdiction disputes. The court held that once a domicile of choice is established, the burden lies on the party asserting its loss

NLJ this week: Arbitration’s fast lane—with guardrails

Early determination is no longer a novelty in arbitration. In NLJ this week, Gustavo Moser, arbitration specialist lawyer at Lexis+, charts the global embrace of summary disposal powers, now embedded in the Arbitration Act 1996 and mirrored worldwide. Tribunals may swiftly dismiss claims with ‘no real prospect of succeeding’, but only if fairness is preserved

Error message

Neurotechnology & the law: contract law

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Muckle LLP—Stacey Brown

Excello Law—Heather Horsewood & Darren Barwick

Ward Hadaway—Paul Wigham