Speech by the Master of the Rolls: John Lehane Memorial Lecture
In his 2026 John Lehane Memorial Lecture, Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls, argued that the legal profession and judiciary must embrace artificial intelligence to improve efficiency, reduce costs and enhance access to justice, while ensuring that AI-generated work is always subject to human oversight and verification. He identifies three key priorities. The first is the responsible adoption of AI by lawyers and judges; secondly, preserving the fundamental right to decisions made by independent human judges, except where parties have freely consented to machine-made determinations; and thirdly, developing clear legal frameworks governing liability for harms caused by AI and agentic systems. Sir Geoffrey contends that AI is already transforming how litigants and lawyers access and use legal information and that resistance to the technology risks making legal systems irrelevant. At the same time, he warns that important rule of law concerns arise if machines begin making judicial decisions without appropriate safeguards. Ultimately, he calls on the global legal community to lead rather than resist technological change by establishing clear principles on AI use in justice systems and providing greater certainty about legal responsibility when AI causes harm.
Response published to consultation on amendments to Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008 for appeals under OSA
The Tribunal Procedure Committee (TPC) has issued a response summarising feedback on its consultation about changes to the Upper Tribunal Rules for appeals under the Online Safety Act 2023. Following responses from three organisations and two individuals, the TPC confirmed that third parties wishing to seek permission to appeal Ofcom decisions should have a three-month time limit to do so, recognising the complexity of such appeals and the time needed to obtain advice, gather evidence and secure resources. However, the TPC reversed its provisional position on costs. While it had initially proposed giving the Upper Tribunal broader discretion to award costs, respondents raised significant concerns about access to justice and the risk of discouraging legitimate public interest challenges. Having considered those concerns and Ofcom’s ability to recover litigation costs through regulatory fees, the TPC concluded that the existing tribunal approach should remain, meaning costs will generally only be awarded where a party has acted unreasonably. The TPC emphasised that it will continue to keep the Rules under review.
High Court dismisses Shein’s copyright infringement claim against Temu
In Roadget Business Pte Ltd and another v Whaleco UK Ltd [2026] EWHC 2165 (Ch), the High Court dismissed Shein’s copyright infringement claim against Temu relating to photographs used in product listings on Temu’s UK marketplace. While the court found that Shein ultimately acquired copyright ownership of the remaining supplier photograph sample, it held that the infringement claims failed for a number of reasons, including consent to the use of those images, the absence of primary or secondary infringement by Temu, and the fact that Temu acted as a neutral marketplace operator that removed notified listings expeditiously. The judge also found that Temu would in any event have been protected by the hosting defence under the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002/2013). Although the court rejected Temu’s allegation that Shein’s claim was an abuse of process, it upheld Temu’s counterclaim under Shein’s cross-undertakings in earlier injunctions, finding that Temu had suffered loss as a result of wrongful takedown notifications, with the amount of damages to be determined at a later trial.
High Court refuses enforcement of contractual step-in right in video game dispute
In Secret Mode Ltd & Anor v Victura, Inc [2026] EWHC 2185 (Ch), the High Court considered competing applications for interim injunctions arising out of a dispute over the video game Six Days in Fallujah. Secret Mode, the publisher, claimed it had validly exercised a contractual “step-in right” allowing it to take over development of the game after rejecting a development milestone, while Victura, the developer, argued that the publishing agreement had already been validly terminated and that Secret Mode had engineered the milestone failure to gain access to valuable source code and intellectual property. Applying the American Cyanamid principles, Mr Justice Richards held that both parties had serious issues to be tried but refused to grant either side the “keys to the kingdom” pending trial. The judge found that Victura had the expertise to continue developing and publishing the game but lacked clearly sufficient financial resources to complete development and meet potential liabilities under its cross-undertaking, while Secret Mode had the financial resources and capability to progress the project but granting it immediate access to Victura’s source code carried a significant risk of irreparable prejudice if Victura’s allegations ultimately proved correct. The court therefore declined both parties’ main injunction applications, preserved the existing position pending trial, and ordered only that Victura be given developer access to the PlayStation and Xbox development portals so that work on the game could continue.
Meta agrees $17 million settlement regarding online safety of minors
California Attorney General Rob Bonta, together with a bipartisan coalition of 51 attorneys general, has announced a proposed $17 billion settlement with Meta to resolve claims that Facebook and Instagram were designed in ways that encouraged compulsive use by children and teenagers while misleading users and the public about associated mental health risks. Subject to court approval, the settlement would require Meta to introduce significant changes, including default daily usage limits and overnight blocks for under-18s, restrictions on notifications during school hours, enhanced parental controls, stronger age assurance measures, a ban on cosmetic procedure filters and visible like counts for minors, and the option of a non-personalised feed. An independent auditor would oversee compliance, and Meta would be prohibited from making misleading claims about its safety features. Meta has separately announced that it intends to work with global regulators on the new measures and is encouraging its competitors to do likewise.
