header-logo header-logo

Prompting privilege?

244934

Can documents produced by AI systems be legally privileged? Stacie Bourton, Tom Whittaker & Beata Kolodziej consider the lessons to learn from recent cases

  • Two recent US decisions considered whether documents created using publicly available AI tools are protected by privilege—with contrasting outcomes.
  • A judgment in England & Wales has given an indication into how the courts here will approach confidentiality where documents are AI-created.
  • Factors relevant to potential future disputes about the intersection between AI and privilege, and steps organisations can take to mitigate the risk of waiving privilege in AI-generated documents.

On 10 February 2026, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled that documents created by a defendant using a publicly available generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool pending a criminal investigation and sent to their lawyer were not covered by attorney-client privilege or work product privilege (United States v Heppner, No 25-cr-00503; the Heppner case).

On the same day, the US District Court for the Eastern District

To access this full article please fill the form below.
All fields are mandatory unless marked as 'Optional'.
If you already a subscriber to New Law Journal, please login here

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Haynes Boone—Jeremy Cross

Firm strengthens global fund finance practice with London partner hire.

DWF—Stephen Webb

DWF—Stephen Webb

Partner and head of national planning team appointed

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

mfg Solicitors—Nick Little

Corporate team expands in Birmingham with partner hire

NEWS
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts

An engagement ring may symbolise romance, but the courts remain decidedly practical about who keeps it after a split, writes Mark Pawlowski, barrister and professor emeritus of property law at the University of Greenwich, in this week's NLJ

Medical reporting organisation fees have become ‘the final battleground’ in modern costs litigation, says Kris Kilsby, costs lawyer at Peak Costs and council member of the Association of Costs Lawyers, in this week's NLJ
back-to-top-scroll