The case, Cork v Smith, involved misleading letters being signed off by senior lawyers who were unaware AI had been used. Writing in NLJ this week, Elisabeth Mason of Penningtons Manches Cooper argues that the episode is less about technology failure than human judgement failure.
Judge Mullen noted that the system wrote like an ‘intelligent human being’ while being ‘plainly wrong’ or ‘extremely misleading’. The solicitor even ignored prompts from the AI itself to verify authorities.
Mason says the case exposes a deeper challenge: how firms will train future lawyers when routine legal work is increasingly automated. While AI promises efficiency and consistency, she warns that firms must ensure junior lawyers still develop the judgement needed to distinguish good legal analysis from convincing nonsense.
