Issue: Vol 173, Issue 8034

Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are known to ‘hallucinate’, making up false information or confabulating to fill gaps in their knowledge. But who is responsible in law for any libel or harm caused as a result? In this week’s NLJ, Chloe Flascher, associate at Withers, addresses this fascinating conundrum.

In this week’s NLJ, Richard Scorer, head of abuse law & public inquiries at Slater and Gordon, highlights the necessity of ‘proper forensic scrutiny’ during public inquiries.

A recent employment appeal concerning a teacher dismissed for expressing gender-critical views on Facebook is a significant development in employment law because the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) focused on the ‘reason why’ question. In this week’s NLJ, Charles Pigott, professional support lawyer, Mills & Reeve, explains why the EAT’s approach ‘marks a significant development’ for discrimination claims, breaking new ground.

'Litigants who lose sometimes blame their lawyer' is a truth widely acknowledged in the legal sector. Writing in this week’s NLJ, Michael Bundock, barrister, dispute resolution, LexisNexis, looks specifically at the circumstances in which a negligence claim may be struck out as an abuse of process because it involves a collateral attack on the earlier judgment.

Public inquiries are most effective when their scrutiny goes below the surface, writes Richard Scorer

A recent Employment Appeal Tribunal ruling on gender-critical beliefs has brought human rights to the fore: Charles Pigott analyses a significant development for discrimination claims

What next when a disgruntled litigant decides to sue their lawyer for negligence after losing a case? Michael Bundock examines when such a claim may be struck out as an abuse

Neil Parpworth outlines the latest thinking—& some potential inaccuracies—from the Home Office on stop & search powers

Billions are spent on counterfeit goods in the EU & UK each year: Matti Lindberg & My Mattsson set out some top tips for brand owners to protect their rights online & on the ground

Artificial intelligence tools are not (yet) above creating false information: who could be liable for the serious harm suffered as a result of publishing that information? Chloe Flascher examines a thorny legal issue