Aipedia: Chartered legal executives

CILEX lawyers using AI in SRA firms

Aipedia, by the Apex broking team · Last reviewed 2026-10-30

A chartered legal executive using AI in a solicitor firm is answerable under the CILEx Code, while the firm and its supervisors answer to the SRA. Both sets of duties apply to the same AI-assisted work, so firm AI policies need to reflect both.

Part of: AI in Chartered legal executives

In short

Many CILEX lawyers work in SRA-regulated firms. They remain individually bound by the CILEx Code of Conduct, including outcome 1.2, outcome 5.12 and supervision outcomes 8.2 to 8.4. The firm must meet SRA standards, including the Misuse of AI warning notice of 17 August 2026 and the AI section of the supervision guidance added on 12 June 2026. The SRA says supervisors stay accountable for AI-assisted work by juniors and unauthorised staff, and Munir shows the signing COLP can be referred. The firm's PI under the SRA minimum terms usually covers the CILEX lawyer's work and contains no AI exclusion.

Two regulators, one piece of work

CILEx Regulation regulates chartered legal executives individually wherever they work. When they work in a solicitor firm, the SRA regulates the firm, and SRA firm-level rules on systems, supervision and confidentiality apply to their work there. CRL's AI position is that lawyers are regulated individually and through the firm and remain responsible for decisions and actions. The SRA approaches AI the same way at firm level. A single AI error, such as an unchecked citation, can therefore engage the CILEX lawyer's own Code duties and the firm's SRA duties at the same time.

What the SRA expects of firms

The SRA's Misuse of AI warning notice of 17 August 2026 applies to all SRA-regulated firms and individuals. Its main points:

AI has no separate legal personality, and its use does not diminish or transfer professional responsibilities.
Supervisors stay accountable for AI-assisted work by juniors and unauthorised staff, and the COLP must take reasonable steps on compliance.
Supervision must be by someone with at least three years' experience (Authorisation of Firms Rule 9.4).
Every authority cited must be genuine, relevant, verifiable and support the point.
Client information should only go into AI with contractual, technical and organisational safeguards; public tools may breach confidentiality and waive privilege.

The supervision guidance adds that AI outputs must be subject to appropriate human review, scrutiny and professional judgement, and that an authorised individual must keep ultimate responsibility. The SRA received 42 reports of potential AI misuse between July 2025 and July 2026. See the SRA warning notice explained.

The CILEX lawyer's own duties

Under the CILEx Code of Conduct, a CILEX lawyer must not knowingly or recklessly allow the court to be misled (1.2), must act within competence (5.3 and 5.4) and must keep client affairs confidential (5.12). Outcomes 8.2 to 8.4 require delegated tasks to be supervised, work to be done by qualified or authorised people, and client matters to be checked by competent people. Where a chartered legal executive supervises paralegals or trainees, those outcomes make them accountable for AI-assisted work below them too.

Who carries the regulatory risk

Both can. In Munir, a junior caseworker drafted grounds with fake authorities and the COLP who signed them was referred to the SRA; the tribunal said supervisors who miss juniors' false citations are likely to be more culpable than those who miss their own. If a CILEX fee earner's AI work goes wrong, the fee earner may face CRL scrutiny under the CILEx Code, while the supervising solicitor, COLP and firm may face SRA scrutiny for supervision and systems. The Divisional Court in Ayinde said at paragraph 9 that leaders must take practical and effective measures.

What can go wrong

Illustrative: a chartered legal executive in a solicitor firm's litigation team uses a generative AI chatbot the firm has not approved to summarise disclosure and draft a witness statement. Client documents are pasted in, and the statement includes a detail the witness did not give. The firm has an AI policy, but it has never been explained to the team and no one checks compliance. The error is raised at trial, the firm self-reports a data breach, and both the fee earner's conduct and the firm's supervision are examined.

Firm AI policies that work for both regimes

List approved tools and ban public tools for client data.
Define which tasks may use AI and the review each requires.
Name the supervisor for each fee earner and record their sign-off.
Make citation checking a recorded step before anything is filed.
Train all fee earners, including CILEX lawyers, and refresh after incidents.
Set out how incidents are escalated, including reporting to regulators and the ICO.

How PI usually responds

A CILEX lawyer employed in an SRA firm is usually covered by the firm's policy under the SRA minimum terms, which have a closed list of exclusions with no AI exclusion. Client claims arising from AI-assisted work would usually be handled like other negligence claims, subject to the policy terms. Fines and sanctions are usually uninsured. See does CILEX PI cover AI mistakes?.

How Apex helps

Apex arranges PI for law firms and chartered legal executives, and a broker can review how your policy treats AI-assisted work by non-solicitor fee earners. See the AI for CILEX lawyers hub, CRL's approach to AI and AI-assisted litigation after Mazur.

Sources

Frequently asked

Does the SRA warning notice apply to me as a CILEX lawyer?

It applies to SRA-regulated firms and individuals, so your firm must meet it, including in how it supervises your work. Your own duties under the CILEx Code continue alongside the firm's SRA obligations.

If my AI work goes wrong, who is disciplined?

Potentially both you and the firm. You remain answerable under the CILEx Code, while your supervisor, the COLP and the firm may be examined by the SRA for supervision and systems, as Munir illustrates.

Can I use AI tools my firm has not approved?

You should not. Using unapproved tools with client data risks breaching outcome 5.12 and the firm's SRA confidentiality duties, and may waive privilege. Follow the firm's AI policy and ask for a tool to be approved if you need one.

Check your PI covers how you use AI

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 callback

Apex 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.