FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Solicitors and law firms
Solicitors can use machine translation to understand foreign-language documents, but relying on it for advice, contracts or evidence without expert checking is a negligence risk. Legal meaning often turns on single words that machine translation can get wrong.
Part of: AI in solicitors and law firms
In short
Law firms use AI translation to triage foreign-language disclosure, understand contracts and correspondence, and prepare first drafts of translations. The risks are mistranslated legal terms, missing nuance in witness evidence, and confidential documents uploaded to public tools. Code 3.2 requires competent service, Code 1.4 forbids misleading the court, and Code 6.3 protects confidentiality. Where a translation will be relied on in court or in a transaction, a qualified human translator usually needs to check or certify it. A client who loses out from a mistranslation may claim against the firm, which PI usually covers.
International disputes, cross-border deals and immigration work produce large volumes of foreign-language material. Firms use AI translation to sort disclosure, read correspondence quickly, check the gist of a foreign contract, and prepare first drafts that a translator then edits. Clients sometimes supply their own machine translations, which brings its own risks.
The SRA's warning notice says solicitors stay accountable for work however it is produced. Code 3.2 requires a competent service, so a solicitor advising on a translated document must be satisfied the translation is reliable enough for the purpose. Code 1.4 and the evidence duties in Code 2.1 to 2.2 apply to translations put before a court. Code 6.3 and the notice's confidentiality standard apply to any document uploaded to a translation tool: contractual, technical and organisational safeguards, secure storage and no training use unless explicitly authorised.
The Civil Justice Council is considering whether legal representatives should declare that AI was not used to generate the content of trial witness statements. How any final rule would apply to translated statements is not yet settled, so treat AI translation of evidence with particular care.
Machine translation is often fluent but can be confidently wrong. Common problems include false friends between legal systems, terms of art translated literally, negatives dropped or reversed, and dates, sums and names mangled. Fluency hides these errors from a reader who does not know the source language.
Where a translation will be filed at court, used in a transaction or relied on by a third party, a qualified translator usually needs to check and, where required, certify it. The level of review should match the use: triage of disclosure can tolerate more error than a translated guarantee.
Illustrative: a firm advises a UK client on a distribution agreement governed by a foreign law, using a machine translation of the original. The translation renders a term meaning "exclusive" as "preferred". The solicitor advises that the client is free to appoint other distributors. The client does so, the counterparty sues abroad and the client claims against the firm for the losses.
In litigation, a mistranslated witness statement can damage the witness's credibility when the error emerges in cross-examination through an interpreter.
A client's claim that advice was wrong because of a mistranslation is a civil liability claim, which the SRA minimum terms require to be covered. The closed list of permitted exclusions does not refer to AI. If the firm engaged a translator who was at fault, the firm may have a recovery claim against them, but the client will usually sue the firm. Our page on legal translation accuracy claims looks at these claims in more detail, and PI for international legal work covers wider cross-border issues.
Apex arranges PI for solicitors and law firms with international practices. A broker can check how your cover handles claims involving translated material and foreign law. See the AI in law firms hub, AI and witness statements and AI e-disclosure.
You can use it to understand the document, but before giving advice that the client will rely on, satisfy yourself the translation is accurate for the key terms. Code 3.2 requires a competent service. For important provisions, have a qualified translator check the wording.
Any translation put before a court must be accurate, and Code 1.4 forbids misleading the court. Courts usually expect translations of evidence to be prepared or checked by a competent translator. The CJC is also considering AI use in witness statements.
Usually, a client's claim against the firm for negligent advice based on a mistranslation is covered civil liability under the SRA minimum terms, which have no AI exclusion. Cover remains subject to the policy terms.
Usually not. The SRA notice warns that entering client material into public tools may breach confidentiality and permanently waive privilege. Use a tool with contractual and technical safeguards that keeps data secure and does not use it for training.
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.
