In partnership with
The last few days have been light on UK legal AI “big announcements”; unsurprising given the time of year. This week’s lead is the UK AI Security Institute’s year end update and what it implies for how organisations may be expected to evidence AI safety and oversight.
UK AI safety signals you can reuse in procurement and governance
The UK AI Security Institute has published a short “year in review” recap of its work, alongside an accessible frontier AI trends summary. The key point for lawyers is not in the technical detail but rather the direction of travel: documented risk controls are becoming normal expectations for advanced AI systems. (AI Security Institute(https://www.aisi.gov.uk/ai-security-institute-year-in-review-2025))
For UK law firms and in house teams, this is practical. If you are procuring AI tools you increasingly need a coherent story about what has been tested, what is monitored, and what happens when the system fails. Even where you are not dealing with “frontier” models directly, vendor supply chains and embedded AI features make these questions relevant. It is increasingly common for routine software solutions to incorporate some form of AI.
It reinforces a point we have seen repeatedly: “we have a policy” is not the same as “we have controls”. Clients and regulators care about evidence of process.
Takeaways
Watch how UK regulators and sector bodies start referencing evaluation methods and assurance language, even indirectly, in 2026.
Avoid over relying on vendor claims without documentation, especially where client data, confidentiality, or privilege is involved.
Read: (AI Security Institute)
On your radar
Clearview AI appeal moves to the next stage: the ICO notes the Upper Tribunal has granted Clearview permission to appeal to the Court of Appeal, in a case that turns heavily on UK GDPR scope and jurisdiction. Why it matters for UK lawyers: it is a live reminder that AI involving scraping, biometrics, or monitoring behaviour creates hard regulatory risk, even where the vendor is overseas. (ICO)
Harvey’s year end product summary: Harvey has published a “top 5 releases” recap, including workflow and collaboration themes. Why it matters for UK lawyers: Harvey is a popular AI tool (although not one the author has yet used) and the market is clearly pushing towards managed collaboration spaces, integrations, and repeatable workflows, which increases the need for governance, auditability, and careful configuration. (Harvey)
The “AI legal rights” debate resurfaces: Yoshua Bengio is quoted discussing the idea of giving AI systems legal rights as a control mechanism, to make shutdown or constraint legally enforceable. Why it matters for UK lawyers: clients may ask about “AI personhood” and liability, and it is worth having a measured, sceptical explanation ready. (The Guardian)
Ad Break
In order to help cover the running costs of this newsletter, please check out the advert below. In line with my promises from the start, adverts will always be declared and actual products that I have tried.
The Hubspot continue to produce useful guides and prompts for AI users.
The Future of AI in Marketing. Your Shortcut to Smarter, Faster Marketing.
Unlock a focused set of AI strategies built to streamline your work and maximize impact. This guide delivers the practical tactics and tools marketers need to start seeing results right away:
7 high-impact AI strategies to accelerate your marketing performance
Practical use cases for content creation, lead gen, and personalization
Expert insights into how top marketers are using AI today
A framework to evaluate and implement AI tools efficiently
Stay ahead of the curve with these top strategies AI helped develop for marketers, built for real-world results.
For Review
Frontier AI trends report, factsheet (GOV.UK)
A short, skimmable overview you can circulate internally to support a sensible conversation about model capability and risk.
Read or listen: (GOV.UK)
Clearview AI scope and jurisdiction update (ICO)
Useful reading for privacy, litigation, and compliance teams, especially if your organisation touches biometrics, scraping, or AI assisted monitoring.
Read or listen: (ICO)
Harvey: top 5 product releases of 2025 (Harvey)
Whilst this is, of course, marketing for Harvey, read the report in detail as a product direction indicator, not as a buying recommendation. It is a helpful prompt for a “do we have controls for collaboration and workflow tools” discussion. This is not an endorsement or advert for Harvey. The author has yet to use Harvey to test its capabilities.
Read or listen: (Harvey)
Practice Prompt
Try the below prompt to build a chronology from documents. Ensure you fill in context and constraints and other aspects marked with {}. Remember to adhere to the Golden Rules and do not upload confidential or privileged information to public tools.
You are a UK solicitor. Goal: {goal}.
Context: {facts}.
Constraints: {constraints}.
Deliverable: {deliverable} (tone: {tone}, length: {length}).
Verify: cite sources; flag uncertainty; list assumptions.
Task: Compare Heads of Terms to a draft lease.
Output:
1. A delta table with columns:
topic | HoTs position | draft clause position | delta | risk | proposed action
2. A short list separating negotiables vs redlines
3. A one-paragraph email summary to the client.
Standards:
Cite clause numbers when referencing the draft.
Flag registration and timing points, and where SDLT or notices may be relevant.
Keep recommendations practical and succinct.How did we do?
Hit reply and tell me what you would like covered in future issues or any feedback. We read every email!
Thanks for reading,
Serhan, UK Legal AI Brief
Disclaimer
Guidance and news only. Not legal advice. Always use AI tools safely.