THIS ISSUE
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
MOVERS & SHAKERS
Thomson Hayton Winkley—Jordan Wallace
Thomson Hayton Winkley strengthens family law team
Ward Hadaway—Barnaby Rosenthall
Construction lawyer returns to Ward Hadaway in Teesside role
Bird & Bird—Shahin Baghaei
Bird Bird hires leading legal transformation expert
NEWS
Legal aid deserts leave almost one in four without adequate access to justice
The Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) has warned solicitors and law firms that using artificial intelligence does not alter their professional obligations, amid concerns over inaccurate legal material and client confidentiality
From forgotten interest claims to case-management appeals, a string of procedural developments offers useful—and occasionally cautionary—lessons for practitioners
Jonathan Fisher KC highlights that it now accounts for around 40% of criminal offences, with roughly 70% involving technology, and argues that the UK cannot simply prosecute its way out of the problem. Detection, investigation and prosecution all require improvement, while different fraud types demand tailored responses.
How forcefully can a litigant criticise a public authority before robust advocacy crosses the line into unreasonable conduct?
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
