Editor

Editorial team — Cognesio LLP

Published by Cognesio LLP

SafeLegalAI is edited by the Cognesio LLP editorial team. The team also builds LegalAI Space, an affiliated product (an Omnizio LP product built by the same team at Cognesio LLP). The team verifies AI-assisted research against primary sources and signs off every record and article; accountability sits with Cognesio LLP, not an individual.

The team verifies AI-assisted research by reopening cited primary sources, checking quotes, dates, names, status labels and figures, then signing off records and articles before publication. Read the editorial standards and methodology.

Researched and drafted with AI assistance; verified against primary sources and edited by Cognesio LLP. The linked official documents are the record — our summaries are not the law and are not legal advice.

Articles edited and verified

News·News brief

India's Supreme Court sets aside customs penalty over AI-hallucinated citations

The Supreme Court of India set aside a Rs 425.28 crore customs penalty after finding fake or misused AI-generated authorities in the order.

India2026-09-042 min read

Briefs·Explainer

May judges and court staff use AI in their own work?

The regulation map records 39 country answers on judicial AI use: binding rules, guidance, proposals and one case-law answer.

United KingdomUnited States (federal)CanadaAustraliaIrelandIndiaInternationalOther2026-09-044 min read

Briefs·Explainer

Must lawyers verify AI output before relying on it?

Across 130 country records, 50 have a binding, guidance, proposed or case-law answer on verification of AI output.

United KingdomUnited States (federal)United States (state)CanadaAustraliaIrelandSingaporeIndiaInternationalOther2026-09-044 min read

Research·Analysis

EU AI Act update — September 2026: the Digital Omnibus is law and Article 50 applies

EU AI Act, July to August 2026: Regulation (EU) 2026/1744 in force, high-risk duties deferred to 2027 and 2028, Article 50 and GPAI enforcement live.

European Union2026-09-038 min read

Research·Analysis

Summer 2026 in legal AI regulation: SRA warning notice, mandatory Irish declaration and a deferred EU Act

Summer 2026 reviewed: the SRA's AI warning notice, Ireland's mandatory AI declaration in civil filings and the EU's deferred high-risk AI Act duties.

United KingdomIrelandEuropean UnionIndiaUnited States (state)South AfricaGLOBAL2026-09-0311 min read

Briefs·Weekly briefingIssue

This week in legal AI safety: tracker reaches 122 incidents; SRA AI warning notice; Ireland's HC 142 live

Issue 1: 50 incidents added, the SRA's misuse-of-AI warning notice, Ireland's Practice Direction HC 142, deferred EU high-risk duties, 128 tools on record.

United KingdomIrelandEuropean UnionUnited States (state)United States (federal)South AfricaGLOBAL2026-09-036 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

Australia's law-society AI guidance: the joint statement and state guides

Australian regulator guidance on generative AI — Queensland's Guidance Statement 37, the three-regulator joint statement, and the NSW solicitor's guide.

Australia2026-07-163 min read

Research·Analysis

Ayinde and Al-Haroun: England's Divisional Court sets the rule on AI-fabricated citations

England's Divisional Court referred two lawyers to their regulators over AI-fabricated citations and warned its restraint on contempt is not a precedent.

United Kingdom2026-07-163 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

Canada's law-society AI guidance: BC, Ontario, Alberta, and the CBA

The version record of Canadian law-society generative-AI guidance — LSBC (2023), the LSO white paper (2024), Alberta's Rules of Engagement, and the CBA toolkit.

Canada2026-07-162 min read

Research·Analysis

The $110,000 Oregon AI-sanctions case, and what the coverage got wrong

Oregon's ~$110,000 AI-sanctions case: terminating sanctions for fifteen fake cases and eight fabricated quotations, and why the headline figure is an aggregate.

US2026-07-163 min read

Research·Analysis

Dayal: the first time an AI misuse referral reshaped a lawyer's right to practise

A solicitor filed four AI-invented authorities; the court's referral led the regulator to bar him as a principal and impose two years' supervision.

Australia2026-07-163 min read

Briefs·Explainer

Does the EU AI Act apply to UK law firms?

The EU AI Act can reach a UK firm when its AI output is used in the EU. What the extraterritorial scope, the AI-literacy duty, and the deferred deadlines mean.

United KingdomEuropean Union2026-07-163 min read

Research·Report

The EU AI Act so far: every milestone from adoption to mid-2026

A dated, primary-sourced timeline of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689: entry into force, the phased application dates, and the Digital Omnibus deferrals.

European Union2026-07-16Updated 2026-09-036 min read

Research·Analysis

Harber v HMRC: the first reported UK case of AI-invented case law

The first reported UK case of AI-invented case law: a litigant cited nine ChatGPT-fabricated decisions to the Tax Tribunal, which found them fake.

United Kingdom2026-07-163 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

Ireland's AI guidance for lawyers and judges: the version record

The Law Society of Ireland's GenAI guidelines, the Judicial Council's guidelines for judges, and the Court of Appeal's five principles — dated and sourced.

Ireland2026-07-163 min read

Research·Analysis

Ko v. Li: how a ChatGPT factum became a criminal-contempt referral in Ontario

An Ontario lawyer filed a ChatGPT-fabricated factum, then lied about writing it — and drew a criminal-contempt referral to the Attorney General.

Canada2026-07-164 min read

Research·Analysis

Pinsent Masons self-referred to the SRA after AI invented an insolvency rule

In Cork v Smith, a junior solicitor's AI tool fabricated the text of a rule that does not exist. Pinsent Masons self-referred to the SRA.

United Kingdom2026-07-163 min read

Research·Analysis

India's Supreme Court: a ruling built on AI-hallucinated cases is 'no decision in law'

India's Supreme Court set aside two tribunal orders built on fake AI-generated precedents and ordered the Bar Council to frame AI rules for lawyers.

India2026-07-162 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

Singapore's legal AI guidance: courts, ministry, and Law Society

Singapore's legal AI guidance, dated and sourced: the Supreme Court's 2024 circular, the Ministry of Law's 2026 sector guide, and the Law Society advisory.

Singapore2026-07-163 min read

Research·Analysis

South Africa's regulator vacuum: courts doing the LPC's job on AI

South Africa's Legal Practice Council has published no guidance on lawyers' AI use — so its courts are referring practitioners to it instead, case by case.

South Africa2026-07-162 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

UK judicial AI guidance: the version history, December 2023 to October 2025

How the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary's AI guidance for judges in England and Wales changed across three versions: Dec 2023, April 2025, and 31 October 2025.

United Kingdom2026-07-163 min read

Briefs·Guidance diffWhat changed

UK legal-profession AI guidance: version histories for solicitors and barristers

The version record of the SRA, Bar Council, and Law Society guidance on generative AI — what each says now, and when it changed.

United Kingdom2026-07-163 min read

Research·Report

US federal court AI standing orders: who requires what

No national US rule governs AI in filings. A primary-sourced registry of representative federal judges' standing orders: certify, disclose, or prohibit.

United States (federal)2026-07-16Updated 2026-07-153 min read

Research·Analysis

Mata v Avianca: the case that started it all

Two New York attorneys, six ChatGPT-invented cases, and a $5,000 sanction — the June 2023 ruling that created the legal AI hallucination era.

US2026-07-152 min read

Briefs·Explainer

What NSW Supreme Court Practice Note SC Gen 23 actually prohibits

New South Wales runs the strictest AI court rule in the common-law world: affidavits must declare AI was NOT used. Here is what the practice note requires.

Australia2026-07-152 min read