What should we do if a client asks us not to use AI on their matter?

If a client tells you not to use AI on their matter, treat it as a client instruction and follow it, subject to two things: you need to know what the client actually means by "AI", and you need to be honest about any effect on cost, timing or the way the work is done. Most such requests come from a specific worry rather than a blanket objection, and a short conversation usually resolves it. Record whatever you agree in writing on the file.

Find out what the client is objecting to

"No AI" can mean very different things. Before you agree to anything, ask. The common concerns are:

• Confidentiality. The client believes their papers will be sent to a third party or used to train a public system. This is the most frequent worry and often the easiest to answer, because it is a question about where data is held, who can see it and what it is used for.
• Accuracy. The client has read about invented cases and does not want fabricated material in their matter.
• Being short changed. The client suspects they are paying for a solicitor's judgement and getting a machine instead.
• Their own obligations. In-house counsel, regulated businesses and public bodies sometimes have policies of their own that they must pass down to advisers.
• The subject matter. A sensitive family, employment or criminal matter, or one involving a person who is unwell or at risk, may make a client uneasy about anything beyond a person reading the papers.

Each of these calls for a different answer. If the concern is confidentiality, you may be able to describe your arrangements and satisfy the client without changing how you work. If the concern is accuracy, the answer is about supervision and checking. If the client simply does not want it, that is their prerogative and you do not need to argue.

Work out what "no AI" would actually cover

This matters more than it sounds. Software with some machine learning in it is now embedded in ordinary office tools: search, spellcheck and grammar suggestions, dictation and transcription, e-mail filtering, document comparison, optical character recognition on scanned papers, e-disclosure platforms, and translation. A literal reading of "no AI" would stop you scanning a bundle.

So be specific with the client. A workable distinction is between:

1. Tools that process text mechanically, such as scanning, searching, comparing and transcribing, which are long established in legal work.
2. Assistants that read papers or sources and produce answers, summaries or drafts, which is usually what the client has in mind.

Agree in plain words which of these the client is asking you to avoid, and put that in your reply. "We will not use any AI assistant to summarise, analyse or draft on this matter. We will continue to use ordinary practice software for scanning, searching and document comparison" is clear and enforceable. "We will not use AI" is neither.

Record it and make it stick

An instruction only works if the people doing the work know about it. Practical steps:

• Confirm the agreement in writing to the client and save that letter or email to the file.
• Put a visible note at the front of the matter file or in the matter record in your case management system, so anyone picking it up sees it.
• Tell everyone working on the file, including any paralegal, costs draftsperson, agent or counsel's clerk you instruct.
• Consider whether the instruction extends to third parties you instruct on the client's behalf. If a client will not have an AI assistant used in your office, they may feel the same about a barrister or expert. Ask rather than assume.
• If the file is later transferred or a new fee earner takes over, make sure the instruction transfers with it.

Breaching the instruction is not just an internal embarrassment. It is a failure to act on the client's instructions, and it can surface in a complaint or in a costs dispute long after the work is done.

Be honest about consequences, and about your own limits

If declining a tool means the work will take longer or cost more, say so at the point of agreeing, not in the bill. That is an ordinary costs information duty. Equally, if a court timetable or a large disclosure exercise makes a manual approach impractical within the budget, tell the client early and let them choose.

You are also entitled to decline the retainer, or to decline it on those terms, if the client's condition makes the work uneconomic or unworkable. That is a commercial decision, and it should be made before the work starts rather than halfway through.

Finally, do not overcorrect. A client saying no to AI is not saying you may cut corners elsewhere. Whatever tools are or are not used, the responsibility for accuracy, confidentiality and quality remains exactly where it always was: with the qualified person who signs the work off.

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. When a client asks about confidentiality, the answer we can give is a concrete one: the firm's information is held in the UK and processed only in the UK and the EU, 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. It assists qualified professionals and does not replace them, and it does not provide legal advice.