Do we need to tell clients we are using AI on their matter?

There is no general rule that a UK firm must announce every piece of software it uses, and AI is not automatically different. What you do owe clients is clear information about the service and the costs, confidentiality, and honesty if they ask a direct question. In practice that means most firms put a short, accurate line in their engagement terms, keep a fuller explanation ready for clients who want one, and disclose specifically where AI use touches something the client would reasonably want to decide about.

What the duty actually rests on

Nothing in your obligations turns on the word "AI". The relevant duties are the ones you already work to.

You must give clients information in a way they can understand, so they can make informed decisions about their matter and the service. If a client would be surprised by how the work is being done, that is a signal to say something.

You must keep client affairs confidential. Putting client material into any third party system engages that duty, whether the system is a case management platform, a transcription service or an AI assistant. The question is not whether you disclose the tool but whether the arrangement protects the information.

You must not mislead. If a client asks whether AI was used and it was, you say so. If your marketing implies partner-level attention on every page and the reality is different, that is a problem regardless of technology.

And under UK GDPR you have transparency obligations about how personal data is processed, which is usually met through your privacy notice rather than a separate conversation.

When a specific mention is worth making

A general line in your terms covers most routine use: research support, first-pass review of documents you have collected, drafting a section that a fee earner then rewrites and signs off. Some situations deserve more than that.

• The client has said no. Some corporate clients and some insurers have outside counsel guidelines that restrict AI use or require prior approval. Check them at the outset rather than after the work is done.
• The client's material is unusually sensitive. Whistleblowing files, safeguarding material, matters involving named children, or anything where the client has asked for tight handling deserve a direct conversation.
• AI use is changing the shape of the bill. If you are quoting a fixed fee or a lower hourly rate because a task now takes less time, explain what has changed. Clients accept efficiency; they do not accept being charged for hours nobody worked.
• The output is going to a court, a tribunal or another party. Courts expect the person who signs a document to stand behind it. Whether or not you disclose to the client, the person signing must have actually checked it.

What a disclosure paragraph can say

Keep it short, true and free of jargon. A workable structure covers four points:

1. That the firm uses technology, including AI tools, to assist with tasks such as searching documents, research and preparing drafts.
2. That a qualified person reviews and takes responsibility for all advice and documents.
3. That client information is handled under the firm's confidentiality and data protection obligations, and that any supplier is bound by written terms.
4. That the client can ask for more detail, or ask the firm not to use such tools on their matter, and who to contact.

Avoid two traps. Do not promise "we never use AI" unless you have checked every system in the firm, including dictation, document comparison and your case management provider's features. And do not write something so broad that it means nothing, because a client who later feels misled will point at it.

Do you need consent?

Usually not, in the sense of a signed permission slip. Consent is the wrong frame for most of this. You are not asking the client to authorise a legal basis; you are informing them about how you deliver the service you have been retained to deliver.

There are exceptions. Where a retainer, panel agreement or outside counsel guideline requires approval, get it in writing. Where a client asks you not to use a particular tool, record that on the file and make sure everyone working on the matter knows.

The more useful question internally is not "did we get consent" but "could we explain this to the client without embarrassment". If a partner would not be comfortable describing the workflow in a meeting, the workflow needs changing, not the disclosure.

Being ready for the follow-up questions

Once you disclose, some clients will ask. The three questions that come up most are: where does my information go, who checks the output, and am I paying less. Have a settled answer to each, agreed across the firm, so that different fee earners do not give different accounts.

It helps to know, for each tool you use, where the data is held, whether it is used to train anything, who inside the firm can see the matter, and what your supplier's contract says. If you cannot answer those about a tool, that is a supplier problem to fix before it becomes a client conversation you cannot have.

Record the position once, centrally, and refresh it when you change suppliers.

Where Alesis fits

Alesis is an AI assistant for UK law firms, made by L25 Limited, used through the web browser, with one conversation for a matter. It prepares drafts for a qualified person to review and sign off, and it does not file, serve or email anything. A firm's information is held and processed in the UK, kept apart from every other firm, and never used to train anything for anyone else, and inside a firm people see only the matters they are on. Those are the points most clients are asking about when they ask how their file is handled.