TL;DR
The Civil Justice Council issued its final report on using AI to draft civil court documents on 29 October, with 15 recommendations. Witnesses of fact would have to declare that AI did not generate or shape the substance of their statements, and experts would have to disclose AI that did. Lawyers’ skeleton arguments and statements of case would face no new declaration, and the council wants urgent work on guidance for people representing themselves.
Who has to declare what
The report, from a working group chaired by Sir Colin Birss, follows an earlier interim report and public consultation. Its central proposal is a plain-language Practice Direction, drafted by the committee that writes the civil procedure rules, that codifies how the courts already treat AI use and its misuse. That direction would take a functional, risk-based approach: rather than sorting tools into generative or administrative categories, the rules would look at the job a tool performed and the danger that job creates for a fair hearing.
For witness statements, the Civil Procedure Rules would change so that a witness of fact declares AI had no hand in the substantive content. Expert reports get a different test: where AI did generate or influence the substance, the expert must say so and give enough detail, naming the tool if necessary, for the other side and the court to scrutinise the method. AI translations would still need a qualified human translator to vouch for them, with the original text attached.
What lawyers are spared
Legal representatives would not have to declare AI use in advocacy documents, nor list the tools they used, nor seek the court’s permission to use AI at all. The report leaves them responsible for accuracy under existing professional duties, and says guidance for the profession should stay with regulators such as the SRA, BSB and Legal Services Board, which it wants to act consistently.
Sir Geoffrey Vos, who chairs the council, said AI “must not compromise the accuracy, reliability or integrity of material placed before the court”. Birss succeeds him as Master of the Rolls on 1 November.
Looking Forward
The recommendations now pass to the rule committee, the regulators and the council itself, which plans to check progress when it next reports on the year. In our view, the witness declaration is the change most likely to touch UK businesses in litigation, because their own staff are often the witnesses. The urgency on litigants in person comes from the consultation, which the report says strongly backed guidance for them, and the Law Society had pressed for clear rules on AI in court documents back in May.