AI is rapidly changing family and civil courts – but who checks it is right?

Artificial intelligence (AI) is being adopted at speed across the UK justice system with limited evidence that it improves people’s experiences, outcomes or access to justice.

A new report written by Dr Holli Sargeant, a Research Fellow in Law at St John’s College, finds that AI is being deployed across the justice system ‘faster than its full effects on the public can be independently or transparently evaluated’.

Commissioned as part of the Nuffield Foundation’s Public right to justice programme, Dr Sargeant’s Artificial intelligence & justice review calls for greater transparency, stronger oversight, and renewed focus on ensuring AI supports fair, effective and accessible justice.  

“AI could make the justice system more accessible and effective, but it could also deepen existing inequalities and erode public trust,” said Dr Sargeant. “Which future we get depends on decisions being made now, largely without independent evidence.

“This report is not an argument against AI in justice; it is an argument for transparent and accountable use, for measuring what really matters, and for ensuring AI improves outcomes for the people the justice system is meant to serve.”

The Nuffield Foundation, an independent charitable trust with a mission to advance social wellbeing, commissioned the evidence scoping review to examine the use of AI and data-driven technologies across administrative, civil and family justice settings in the UK, but primarily England and Wales.

Dr Sargeant, whose research explores the intersection of law and artificial intelligence, including the governance of AI and its potential to improve legal research and access to justice, found that 45 AI tools are already in use or development across civil and family justice and advice services, yet only seven had any publicly available evaluation and many performance claims remain unverified.

The report notes, ‘the evidence base cannot answer the central question of whether AI improves access to justice in practice, making robust independent evaluation an urgent priority’.

While existing research suggests AI could help reduce administrative burdens, improve access to legal information, and support routine legal work, research has not kept pace with its rollout. Most evaluations focus on technical performance and efficiency gains, rather than fairness, legal outcomes, user experience, and public confidence – issues that matter more to people who are looking for a solution to their legal problems.

The report finds that ‘AI evaluations have not yet measured the outcomes that matter most from the standpoint of the people the justice system serves, with fairness, understanding, user experience and public confidence all under-examined’.

Artificial intelligence & justice argues that as AI becomes increasingly embedded in justice processes, policymakers, practitioners and developers must prioritise independent research, transparency and accountability to ensure technology supports, rather than undermines, access to justice.

‍

Key findings of the report

• ‍AI adoption is outpacing evaluation. Dozens of tools are already live, but independent scrutiny and evidence about their effectiveness are limited, with only seven having any publicly available evaluation. The report says that AI deployment is proceeding ‘well ahead of the publicly available evidence’
  ‍‍
• Too much attention is paid to efficiency and not enough to people. Existing research focuses heavily on productivity and time savings, while the impact on fairness, legal outcomes, and understanding people’s rights and experiences is rarely measured
  ‍‍
• AI has the potential to improve access to justice but also risks deepening inequalities. While AI tools may help people find legal information and support more easily, concerns remain about bias, exclusion, misinformation and unequal impacts on different groups. Few evaluations examine who benefits from AI use and who may be disadvantaged
  ‍
• ‍AI is not a ‘shortcut’ to justice: public trust depends on transparency and human oversight. The research suggests people are often sceptical about AI being used in the justice system, particularly where it appears to replace rather than support human judgment. Some perceive AI as a ‘shortcut’ that bypasses the careful consideration people expect from legal processes. The review found that ‘human oversight is perceived as vital to the procedural fairness of AI use’, highlighting the importance of ensuring AI supports, rather than substitutes, decisions made by people.

‍

Research recommendations

• Future evaluation and research focus on outcomes that matter most to justice users, including whether people can better understand their rights, access appropriate support, participate meaningfully in proceedings, achieve fair outcomes, and feel they have been treated with dignity and fairness
  ‍
• Stronger monitoring of fairness and differential impacts across demographic groups, alongside user-centred design and appropriate human support, particularly insensitive justice settings where automated assistance alone may not be sufficient
  ‍
• AI could help make justice more accessible and effective, but whether it ultimately advances or undermines access to justice remains ‘an open question, and one the public is entitled to have answered’.

Rob Street, Director of Justice at the Nuffield Foundation, said: “AI and digital tools have the potential to address many of the justice system’s current challenges and people’s access to it, but as this research shows their benefits – and public trust in them – will remain limited unless concerns about effectiveness, legitimacy and transparency are addressed.”