What does the report mean by substantive content?
The report defines substantive content as the facts, evidence, opinion, reasoning or argument in a document. AI generates it by producing or modifying it, and influences it by affecting its selection, analysis, development or evaluation. Uses such as spelling and grammar checks, "where they are not capable of generating or influencing substantive content, do not require specific guidance."
Would lawyers have to declare AI use in skeleton arguments?
The report recommends against a new declaration. Recommendation Four says no new rules requiring legal representatives to declare AI use in statements of case, skeleton arguments or other advocacy should be introduced, and that "Legal representatives should remain responsible, further to existing obligations, for the accuracy and reliability of any such documents."
What would change for witness statements and expert reports?
The report proposes two new declarations through amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules. A witness of fact would declare that AI used in preparing their statement "has not generated or influenced its substantive content", so the evidence is given in their own words. An expert would make a declaration where AI generates or influences the substantive content of their report.
Who would write the guidance for lawyers on AI?
Recommendation One says guidance for the profession "should remain the responsibility of legal services regulators". It asks those regulators, including the Legal Services Board, to work together so their guidance is mutually consistent, and to explore joint guidance. The report says the starting point for regulating AI use should stay with legal representatives and their professional regulators.
Is any of this a rule yet?
These are recommendations, and none of them has changed the court rules yet. The report asks the Civil Procedure Rule Committee to prepare a Practice Direction, and the new declarations would need amendments to the Civil Procedure Rules. The Civil Justice Council says it will review how far the recommendations have been taken forward in its next Annual Review.
Margo Legal is not a law firm and does not give legal advice. This page summarises the Civil Justice Council's own published report as at 30 October 2026.
Sources
- Civil Justice Council, Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents, Final Report, 29 October 2026 (paras 1.2, 1.4, 2.2, 2.3, 2.5 and 2.6; Recommendations One, Four, Six and Nine): https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/10/Use-of-AI-for-the-Preparation-of-Court-Documents-Final-Report.pdf
- Courts and Tribunals Judiciary, Civil Justice Council, Use of AI in preparing court documents (final report, 29 October 2026): https://www.judiciary.uk/related-offices-and-bodies/advisory-bodies/cjc/current-work/use-of-ai-in-preparing-court-documents/