FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Barristers
Counsel can use AI to help draft an opinion, but rC20 requires the advice to reflect counsel's own judgement and leaves responsibility with counsel. Opinions are relied on to settle, issue or fund claims, so an AI-shaped error turns quickly into a negligence claim.
Part of: AI in Barristers
In short
Merits opinions, advice on evidence and advice on quantum are where barristers' reasoning is most directly relied on. The BSB's AI guidance warns that AI errors go beyond false citations to flawed reasoning and missed key issues, and rC20 makes the professional judgement counsel's personally. Uploading instructions to a tool engages CD6 and rC15. If a solicitor or lay client relies on a wrong conclusion, the claim is usually made against counsel and handled under their compulsory BMIF cover, which has no AI exclusion but is limited to the cover purchased.
Barristers use AI to turn instructions into a summary of facts, propose a structure for a merits opinion, list the issues to address, draft explanatory passages for a lay client, or produce an advice on evidence checklist. Some ask a tool for a view on prospects as a sense check. The output is usually fluent and confident, which is the problem: the BSB guidance says AI can get reasoning wrong and miss the key issues, not just citations.
Under the BSB's AI guidance, rC20 (personal professional responsibility and own judgement) and rC4 (independence) mean an opinion must be counsel's conclusion, not a tool's. CD2 and CD7 require advice in the client's best interests and to a competent standard. Putting instructions or privileged material into a tool engages CD6 and rC15, and rC86 treats the tool as outsourcing. Where AI materially affects the nature or scope of the service, rC19 points towards telling the client.
Illustrative: counsel asks an AI tool to summarise a long set of instructions and draft the facts section of a merits opinion on a professional negligence claim. The summary omits a letter that starts time running earlier than the tool assumed. Counsel's analysis builds on the summary and advises good prospects. The client issues, the defendant pleads limitation and the claim fails. The client then sues counsel for the costs thrown away.
The risk is greatest where AI fills gaps in the facts or reasoning without signalling uncertainty. AI summaries of bundles and public access clients who add AI material of their own raise similar issues.
An opinion is rarely read only by the person who asked for it. Instructing solicitors build their own advice on it, lay clients decide whether to issue or settle, and funders or after-the-event insurers may rely on a merits assessment when deciding whether to back a claim. An AI-introduced error can therefore travel further than an ordinary drafting slip. Clear statements of the documents considered, the assumptions made and the limits of the advice help define who is entitled to rely on it and for what.
Negligent advice is the core risk that the compulsory BMIF cover exists for. The BSB minimum terms require at least £500,000 each and every claim, with defence costs in addition, and the closed list of permitted exclusions contains nothing on AI or technology. A claim of this kind is therefore usually handled like any other, subject to the deductible and policy terms. Related claims from the same act or originating cause may be treated as one claim, which matters if a template prompt repeats the same error across several advices. Counsel advising on high-value matters may want to consider top-up cover; see barristers' PI and BMIF and does BMIF cover AI mistakes.
Apex arranges PI for barristers and can check whether your limit is adequate for the value of the advice you give and how any top-up layer treats AI-assisted work. More guides on the AI at the Bar hub.
Yes, as a drafting aid, but rC20 requires the opinion to reflect your own professional judgement and you remain responsible for it. Check the facts against the instructions and verify every authority and conclusion through independent sources, as the BSB guidance requires.
Usually the barrister who gave the advice. Self-employed barristers carry their own compulsory BMIF cover, so a claim for negligent advice is normally notified and handled under that policy, subject to its terms and limit.
You can use it as a sense check, but the assessment of prospects must be your own under rC20 and rC4. Tools tend to give confident answers without flagging weak assumptions, so treat any AI view as a prompt to test your reasoning, not as a second opinion.
The BSB says tell clients where AI materially affects the nature or scope of the service (rC19). Using a secure tool to tidy wording may not need disclosure; relying on AI for a significant part of the analysis or uploading their documents to a third-party tool is more likely to.
Tell us about your firm and the work you do. A broker will review how your current PI treats AI-assisted work, or arrange new cover. No fee for a quote. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start a PI quote Request a callbackApex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information about how AI is used in the profession and how insurance may respond. It is not legal, regulatory or insurance advice on your circumstances, and it does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
