FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Aipedia: Translators and interpreters
AI live captioning and speech-to-speech translation now run alongside or instead of human interpreters at meetings, and an interpreter asked to supervise the AI may be blamed for its errors. Recorded sessions also raise confidentiality questions for interpreters and their clients.
Part of: AI in Translators and interpreters
In short
Event organisers and businesses use AI live captioning and speech-to-speech translation on remote meeting platforms and at conferences. Some ask interpreters to supervise AI output, correct it or act as a fallback. Live errors are hard to correct and can mislead decision-makers. NRPSI and CIOL stress human oversight in high-stakes settings and data protection safeguards. Sessions are often recorded and processed by third parties, so confidentiality matters. Interpreters' PI usually responds to negligent interpreting, but liability for an AI system's own errors depends on the role agreed. Define your role in writing.
Remote meeting platforms and event technology may offer live AI captions in several languages and synthetic speech-to-speech translation. Organisers use them for internal meetings, webinars and some conference sessions. Human interpreters meet these tools in three ways: working alongside them on different channels, being asked to monitor and correct AI output, or being replaced for lower-stakes sessions and retained for the rest.
Remote interpreting adds its own layer. An interpreter working from home on a client's meeting platform may not know whether the platform is generating its own captions or transcript, where the audio is processed, or whether the session is stored. The interpreter's output can end up feeding a transcript or summary that is circulated afterwards as the record of the meeting, with the interpreter's name attached to words they did not choose.
CIOL's AI Voices white paper says high-stakes interpreting needs humans "in the loop", and NRPSI's 2026 article calls for human oversight in high-stakes settings.
If you are engaged to interpret, you owe reasonable care and skill under section 13 of the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. If you are engaged to supervise an AI system, your duty depends on what you agreed: monitoring a caption feed for obvious errors is a different job from guaranteeing its accuracy. Confidentiality obligations in your contract and any NDA apply to what you hear, and recorded sessions are personal data handled by several parties, so the ICO's AI guidance is relevant to the organiser and to you if you process recordings.
Illustrative scenario: a company runs a cross-border board meeting with AI speech-to-speech translation and hires an interpreter to "supervise". The interpreter is also asked to cover a second channel. During a discussion of an acquisition, the AI renders a conditional offer as unconditional. The interpreter does not catch it in time. The counterparty relies on what it heard, and a dispute follows over what was said and who was responsible for the translation.
Other live risks include:
Interpreters' PI usually responds to claims alleging negligent interpreting. Where you were supervising an AI system, the insurer may look at what you agreed to do and whether the claim arises from your negligence rather than a technology failure. If you have accepted responsibility for the AI output by contract, that wider liability may not be covered. Confidentiality claims may involve both PI and cyber cover. Our page on conference interpreter PI and confidentiality looks at the event setting in more detail.
Before accepting work that involves AI live translation, agree these points:
Related guides: AI subtitling and transcription and client confidentiality and AI tools.
Apex arranges PI for conference and remote interpreters. A broker checks your cover for live and remote work and how the policy treats roles that involve supervising AI; see Does translators' PI cover AI mistakes? and working with a PI broker. Return to the AI in translation and interpreting hub.
It depends on what you agreed. If your contract says you monitor and correct the output, you may be held to that standard. If it says the AI channel is outside your responsibility, your exposure is narrower. Put the role in writing before the event.
That depends on your contract and on data protection law, since a recording of your voice is personal data. Agree in advance whether recording is allowed, who keeps it, for how long and whether it may be used to train AI systems.
Usually, if the claim alleges your negligent interpreting caused a loss, subject to the wording and the limit. Live work is hard to evidence afterwards, so notes, the brief and any recordings you are allowed to keep can help defend a claim.
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.
