UK law
High Court considers case where solicitors used misleading AI-generated material in correspondence with court
In Cork and another v Smith [2026] EWHC 1199 (Ch), the High Court considered a case involving misleading legal submissions made by the applicants’ former solicitors. The court found that a junior lawyer had relied on generative AI to carry out research. It emphasised that legal professionals bear ultimate responsibility for their work and cannot outsource legal research or legal reasoning to AI. AI is a tool to be used with caution and may be wholly unreliable. It may provide a jumping-off point for research and legal reasoning, but it does not, at least at present, remove the need for proper research and careful thought on the part of a legal professional, even a very junior one. The firm made a self-referral to the SRA, so the judge decided that, together with publication of the judgment, no further action was necessary.
Supreme Court Justice calls for proactive AI regulation in civil procedure
Lord Briggs has made a speech arguing that AI will transform civil justice far more rapidly and profoundly than earlier waves of digitisation, and warning that the legal system must prepare now rather than respond belatedly. Drawing on the slow, piecemeal way procedural rules evolved during digitisation, he calls for the proactive development of clear principles and rules to govern AI use before it becomes embedded. He says AI could significantly improve access to justice by enabling litigants in person to generate claims and obtain legal guidance cheaply, but this is likely to trigger a “tsunami” of small and medium-value cases that could overwhelm the courts unless they themselves adopt AI to improve efficiency. This raises both practical challenges (how courts cope with increased volume) and a deeper “democratic question”: whether, and to what extent, AI should replace human judges in decision-making. He argues that this is ultimately a matter for society rather than the judiciary. He concludes that careful regulation, transparency and early policy thinking are essential to harness AI’s benefits while preserving the human role in delivering justice and maintaining public confidence in the rule of law.
ICO issues response to government on safe AI-powered innovation
In January 2026, the Technology Secretary and the Business Secretary jointly wrote to the Information Commissioner asking the ICO to build on its previous growth commitments to government and publish a plan for enabling safe AI-powered innovation by the end of May 2026. Its response sets out the progress it is making on its June 2025 AI and biometrics strategy, under which it is providing regulatory certainty and improving standards in AI, automated decision-making and biometric technology across the private and public sectors, as well as its plans for the next 12 months. In 2026/27, the ICO will undertake further work to ensure consumers trust AI innovation and businesses have greater regulatory certainty on how data protection law applies to AI development and deployment. Its priorities will include developing its AI code of practice, issuing dedicated guidance on agentic AI, and supporting consumers in navigating an increasingly personalised AI landscape. More details of its 2026/27 workplan will be published in its new AI strategy in the coming months.
Ofcom publishes strategic approach to AI
Ofcom has set out its approach to enabling safe and secure AI adoption across the sectors it regulates and within its own work. Its report explains how it applies what it calls broadly technology-neutral, outcomes-based regulatory principles to AI, and takes a case study approach to demonstrate its role in supporting its sectors to safely innovate with AI. Its approach to AI aligns with its broader mission of making communications work for everyone.
Financial Services Regulation Committee publishes report on regulation of stablecoins
The House of Lords Financial Services Regulation Select Committee launched an inquiry in January into the growth and proposed regulation of stablecoins in the UK, with a focus on the regulatory proposals from the Bank of England and the Financial Conduct Authority. The Committee has now issued its report which includes findings that the UK is currently lagging behind in developing its regulatory regime compared to the USA and EU. The regulators must adhere to current timelines and ensure that the final regulatory regime must not be delayed. There are several elements of the UK’s proposed regime which would diverge from international equivalents, including in requirements for systemic issuers to hold unremunerated backing assets, the proposed stablecoin holding limits, and the restrictions on commercial banks issuing stablecoins. The Bank of England should conduct more detailed modelling of the impact of imposing holding limits on high-value use cases. HM Treasury should consider with the Bank of England and the FCA whether the existing legal frameworks are sufficient to detect and deter illicit activity using private unhosted and unregulated wallets, and should be prepared to legislate to restrict their use if necessary. In addition, HM Treasury should set out further details about how it will determine whether stablecoins are systemic. Finally, the FCA should reconsider whether a k-factor requirement for stablecoin issuers that increases with the volume of stablecoins is appropriate.
CMA acts on trader recommendation platforms
In November 2024, the Competition and Markets Authority published guidance for trader recommendation platforms. It has now written to several trader recommendation platforms where it has identified concerns about their practices. It has highlighted those concerns and reminded the platforms to review their practices and make any necessary changes. The CMA’s compliance advice explains that platforms must ensure they comply with their consumer protection obligations under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024.
Court endorses CMA action as Emma Sleep agrees to change sales practices
The CMA has secured a settlement with Emma Sleep after the company admitted breaching consumer law by using misleading countdown timers and false “high demand” messages and “discount” claims. On 22 May 2026, a High Court order confirmed that Emma Sleep had acted unlawfully. This part of the case, brought under the CMA’s previous consumer powers, has now been settled, with the company giving binding undertakings to stop these practices and ensure any future claims on its website are clear, accurate and do not create a false impression that consumers need to act quickly. Emma Sleep must also stop using ‘limited time’ sales or discounts where substantially similar deals continue after the deadline has passed. In addition, it must put robust compliance measures in place across its business, including monitoring compliance with the undertakings, reporting to the CMA, and taking swift action to address any potential breaches. These legally binding changes are now enforceable by the court. Any failure to comply could result in contempt of court proceedings and significant penalties. The remaining aspect of the CMA’s case against Emma Sleep, focused on reference pricing (more commonly known as “was/now” pricing), will be determined at a trial which started this week.
Ofcom fines porn company £600,000
Ofcom has fined pornography provider Youngtek Solutions Ltd £500,000 for failing to put age checks in place, plus a further £100,000 for failing to respond on time to a formal request for information from the regulator. Under the Online Safety Act, sites that allow pornographic material must use highly effective age assurance to prevent children from readily accessing that content. Ofcom found that, from 25 July 2025 to 22 September 2025, Youngtek Solutions – which runs four adult sites – failed to comply with these duties. As a result, Ofcom imposed a £500,000 financial penalty, which will be passed to HM Treasury. The company has since implemented age assurance measures on all the sites covered by the investigation. Ofcom says it will continue to monitor those sites to ensure their age-checking methods are highly effective at preventing children from accessing pornographic content. Ofcom also emphasised that obtaining accurate information from companies is fundamental to its role in making life safer online in the UK. Such requests help it assess and monitor industry compliance with safety duties, and firms are legally required to respond accurately, completely and on time. During the investigation, Ofcom issued a formal request for information to Youngtek Solutions. Although the company eventually responded, it did so after the deadline had passed. As a result, Ofcom imposed an additional fine of £100,000.
ICO issues statement on age assurance
The ICO has issued a statement on age assurance. It says it is committed to ensuring that the internet is a privacy-friendly and safe space for children. To achieve this, and to comply with data protection law, companies that say their services are suitable only for users above a minimum age need to take effective steps to prevent access by children below that age. In March, the ICO wrote to TikTok, Snapchat, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube and X, calling on them urgently to review and strengthen their age assurance measures to prevent underage children from accessing their services. The responses showed that some services are taking, or considering, additional steps to protect children, but none has yet introduced new, viable and privacy-friendly age assurance solutions. Overall, the ICO says it does not yet have confidence that appropriate measures are being put in place, and it is concerned that underage children’s data is still being processed on platforms they should not be able to access. While its engagement with these platforms has not yet concluded, it has expressed concern about the limited progress made so far and is considering next steps, including regulatory action. The ICO will continue to engage with the government, alongside Ofcom, on the outcome of the government’s children’s wellbeing consultation to ensure that any legislative changes deliver robust protection for children online.
EU law
European Commission publishes 2025 report on the Digital Markets Act implementation
The European Commission has published its third annual report on progress towards the objectives of the Digital Markets Act, which is designed to support fair and contestable digital markets in the EU. The report summarises progress in open proceedings under the DMA. Some proceedings concluded with two non-compliance decisions accompanied by fines: one concerning anti-steering and another concerning consumers’ options over the use of their personal data. In addition, last year the Commission set out the conditions for interoperability with connected devices such as smartwatches and other wearables, thereby closing two specification proceedings opened in 2024. The Commission also opened three market investigations relating to the cloud sector: two into whether certain cloud computing services should be designated as gatekeepers, and a third into the effectiveness of the DMA in supporting competitiveness and fairness in that sector. It also opened a non-compliance investigation into the possible demotion of media publishers’ content in search results. The report also provides updated data on gatekeepers’ reporting obligations, including mergers and acquisitions and audited descriptions of consumer profiling techniques. Finally, it outlines this year’s activities relating to cooperation across legal frameworks, including work involving the DMA High-Level Group and the Commission’s cooperation with authorities in third countries.
AI Act enforcement gets independent expert support
The European Commission has appointed a Scientific Panel and an Advisory Forum to support enforcement of the Artificial Intelligence Act. The two bodies will advise the Commission’s AI Office and national authorities on the application of the rules, with members serving two-year terms. The Scientific Panel brings together 60 independent experts with experience in frontier AI, engineering, technical auditing, industry and societal impact. It will focus on general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and systems, systemic risks, model classification, evaluation methodologies and cross-border market surveillance. The Advisory Forum will provide independent technical expertise and advice on a broad range of issues relating to the AI Act, including standardisation and implementation challenges. Key EU agencies will have a permanent role in the forum, including the EU Agency for Fundamental Rights, the EU Agency for Cybersecurity (ENISA), and standardisation bodies.
Commission seeks feedback on draft trusted flaggers guidelines under the Digital Services Act
The European Commission is seeking feedback on its draft guidelines on trusted flaggers, organisations that specialise in identifying illegal content online, with a view to ensuring a clear and consistent framework under the Digital Services Act (DSA). Under the DSA, online platforms must prioritise notices from trusted flaggers reporting illegal content, such as child abuse material, intellectual property infringements and online fraud, while retaining responsibility for verifying whether the content is in fact illegal. The draft guidelines clarify both the criteria for, and the process by which, Digital Services Coordinators award trusted flagger status. They also provide guidance on the technical requirements that trusted flaggers and platforms should follow when processing notices of illegal content. Finally, the guidelines aim to ensure that trusted flaggers remain independent, objective and accountable, and that they respect freedom of expression. They also include measures to safeguard the integrity of the trusted flagger mechanism and prevent misuse. These include annual public transparency reports by trusted flaggers and procedures for suspending or revoking trusted flagger status. The consultation on the guidelines ends on 26 June 2026. Following feedback, the Commission plans to adopt the guidelines in the second half of 2026.
EU consumer groups file complaints against Meta, TikTok and Google for failing to protect consumers against financial scams
BEUC has filed complaints with the European Commission and national regulators against Meta, TikTok and Google for failing to address the proliferation of financial fraudulent ads on their platforms as the EU’s DSA requires from them. Between December 2025 and March 2026, BEUC and consumer groups across 13 countries reported nearly 900 ads suspected of breaching EU law. Out of these, the platforms took down only 27% of the ads based on these notices, whereas 52% of the reports were rejected or ignored. That means hundreds of financial scams are still active, reaching more than 200 million European consumers every month and risking further financial losses and other harms. Consumer groups call on the European Commission and national Digital Services Coordinators (DSCs) to investigate the measures taken by Meta, TikTok, and Google to mitigate systemic risks related to financial scam and require them to comply with the DSA. They say that if there is continued non-compliance, the Commission should impose fines.
International
G7 nations agree joint approach to protecting children online and to drive safe AI growth
Following talks at the G7 Digital Ministers meeting in Paris, the UK and its G7 partners have agreed a common approach to protecting children and young people from harm online. G7 countries have adopted a set of shared principles to help tackle the growing risks children face in the digital world, from harmful content to exploitation. These focus on promoting digital literacy, addressing risks to children from AI chatbots, and pressing digital service providers to take a robust approach to online safety. The agreement makes clear that children’s safety should not be treated as an afterthought but should instead be built into digital services from the outset and supported by effective age assurance. It also includes a commitment to closer cooperation between digital service providers, children, parents and guardians. Countries also agreed that data sharing between online platforms, parents and researchers should be improved to better understand how digital services affect children’s wellbeing. G7 countries also reaffirmed their commitment to ensuring that AI is developed and used in ways that people can trust, while recognising the technology’s transformative benefits.
