Skip to content
Back to the daily read

Daily Read: AI

Judge Vos Urges AI to Handle Civil Cases

England’s senior judge Geoffrey Vos, who will retire as Master of the Rolls in a few days, has called for the use of artificial intelligence in civil courts. He says AI could resolve many low‑value disputes quickly and cheaply, while leaving complex commercial and family matters to human judges. Vos, who routinely uses Microsoft Copilot to locate and summarise documents, was impressed by a Shenzhen court that already relies heavily on AI for casework. He warns that the technology can create hallucinated case law and that a lawyer recently lost a licence for misusing it. The judge notes a 10 % annual rise in county‑court claims, driven by people using chatbots to draft claims forms. He argues that most of these claims are not frivolous and that AI can increase access to justice for ordinary citizens. Vos stresses that courts already assess forged documents, so deep‑fake evidence is no different from past challenges. He believes a consensus‑based framework will be needed to integrate AI while preserving judicial integrity. The debate will shape future regulations as the legal profession adapts.

· Wired

The essential points

  1. 01Judge Geoffrey Vos, retiring Master of the Rolls, advocates AI for low‑value civil disputes.
  2. 02He cites a Shenzhen court that already uses AI to decide cases, inspiring his proposal.
  3. 03AI risks include hallucinated case law and a lawyer losing a licence for misuse.
  4. 04County‑court filings rose 10 % yearly as chatbots help draft claims, expanding access to justice.
The full brief

England’s senior judge Geoffrey Vos, who will retire as Master of the Rolls in a few days, has called for the use of artificial intelligence in civil courts. He says AI could resolve many low‑value disputes quickly and cheaply, while leaving complex commercial and family matters to human judges. Vos, who routinely uses Microsoft Copilot to locate and summarise documents, was impressed by a Shenzhen court that already relies heavily on AI for casework.

He warns that the technology can create hallucinated case law and that a lawyer recently lost a licence for misusing it. The judge notes a 10 % annual rise in county‑court claims, driven by people using chatbots to draft claims forms. He argues that most of these claims are not frivolous and that AI can increase access to justice for ordinary citizens.

Vos stresses that courts already assess forged documents, so deep‑fake evidence is no different from past challenges. He believes a consensus‑based framework will be needed to integrate AI while preserving judicial integrity. The debate will shape future regulations as the legal profession adapts.