header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
29 May 2026 / Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer
Issue: 8163 / Categories: Features , Public , Human rights , Judicial review , Artificial intelligence
printer mail-detail

Public law update: May 2026

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
251069
© Ray Tang/Shutterstock

Artificial intelligence, proportionality & purpose are under the spotlight in the latest round-up by the team at Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer
  • A Divisional Court decision finding use of facial recognition technology to be in accordance with the law has potentially significant implications for the use of artificial intelligence by public authorities.
  • The nature of the proportionality test has been discussed and clarified further by both the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Appeal, with the latter also touching on the tricky goodwill/future income distinction under A1P1.
  • The courts have shown willingness to police the true purpose behind decisions and ensure that they are lawful and in accordance with the relevant legislation or policy.

Lawfulness of AI use

In R (Thompson and another) v The Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis [2026] EWHC 915 (Admin), the Divisional Court considered whether the police’s use of live facial recognition technology (LFR) was ‘in accordance with the law’ (IAWL) for the purposes

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

Read All
Sponsored by
Womble Bond Dickinson—Paula Myers

Womble Bond Dickinson—Paula Myers

Womble Bond Dickinson appoints Paula Myers to private capital team in Leeds

mfg Solicitors—five promotions

mfg Solicitors—five promotions

Law firm mfg Solicitors announces five promotions at Birmingham office

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners—six promotions

Brabners adds six to partnership in record year for partner promotions

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Raising the age bar
Calls to raise the age of criminal responsibility from 10 to 14 have been renewed, with the Bar Council arguing the current threshold criminalises children too early and risks pushing them towards lifelong offending
NLJ this week: Beyond AI hallucinations
The legal profession's AI challenge extends far beyond fabricated case citations, according to a warning about the next phase of technological risk
NLJ this week: AML supervision shake-up
Law firms should use the transition period before the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) assumes anti-money laundering (AML) supervision to strengthen governance and compliance, experts have warned
NLJ this week: Options for global evidence gathering
Cross-border disputes increasingly demand creative approaches to gathering evidence, with litigators needing to look beyond traditional letters of request
NLJ this week: Indefinite or forever?
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified the distinction between contracts of 'indefinite' and 'perpetual' duration, with potentially significant implications for commercial drafting
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll