Regulation Tracker · 20 questions
Rulings and regulation of AI legal products offered directly to the public, and the unauthorised-practice line.
As of 2026-09-04, 4 of 130 countries and entities have a binding rule for consumer AI legal services, 3 have official guidance, 0 have a proposal, 1 are set by case law, 111 were checked with nothing found and 11 remain unclear. Binding countries: France, Germany, Ireland, United Kingdom.
Tap or hover a country. Faint land has no record yet. Miller projection; boundaries as published by Natural Earth (India point of view) — see the disclaimer.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Articles 54 to 56 of loi no. 71-1130 of 31 Dec 1971 reserve paid legal consultation and drafting of acts to regulated professionals; they are technology-neutral and catch consumer AI legal products. No AI-specific French ruling found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
The Rechtsdienstleistungsgesetz (RDG) reserves out-of-court legal services and is technology-neutral. The BGH has already drawn the line for automated legal products: Urt. v. 9 Sep 2021, I ZR 113/20 ('smartlaw') held a digital contract generator is not a Rechtsdienstleistung, while Urt. v. 27 Nov 2019, VIII ZR 285/18 ('wenigermiete.de') admitted registered legal-tech collection models. No AI-specific ruling since.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
The Solicitors Acts and the Legal Services Regulation Act 2015 reserve specified legal activities and are technology-neutral. No Irish ruling or regulation specific to consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Reserved legal activities under the Legal Services Act 2007 apply; the SRA authorised Garfield.Law, the first AI-only firm, in 2025.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
ČAK's Stanovisko (points 2–4) states AI in any form cannot be a provider of legal services under § 1 of the Act on Advocacy; answers resolving a concrete legal problem are reserved legal advice, and website AI implying advice from a qualified lawyer is 'highly inappropriate'.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
The Ministry of Justice guideline of August 2023 on AI contract-drafting and review services and Attorney Act article 72: a service breaches article 72 only if provided for remuneration, concerning a legal case, and constituting legal affairs. Generative-AI services are judged on the same framework.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
TBB Guide prohibited-use list protects the advocacy monopoly: lawyers must not make 'guaranteed result' or 'lawyer-free legal advice' claims, must not present AI-assisted services as replacing legal judgement, and must not facilitate non-lawyers or systems appearing to give independent legal advice through AI.
No countries in this status.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
The Superior Court of Justice refused in June 2025 to take down an AI petition-drafting site for small-claims courts, finding no prima facie unauthorised practice where the law dispenses with counsel; the 27th Federal Court of Rio de Janeiro rejected the bar's claim on the merits in November 2025.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
The Legal Profession Uniform Law prohibits unqualified legal practice, but no Australian ruling, regulator decision or guidance applying it to consumer AI legal products was found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No Austrian ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No Belgian ruling or regulation on AI legal products offered to the public found as of 4 September 2026. The guidelines permit lawyers to develop their own chatbots provided users are told the system is automated.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No Canadian ruling or rule on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026. The Barreau du Québec operates an innovation sandbox that allows non-conforming legal-services business models, including AI tools built by non-lawyers, to be tested under conditions.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Denmark reserves court representation to lawyers but has no ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026. Consumer AI legal services operate in Egypt without any published regulatory position from the Bar or the Ministry of Justice.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Court representation is largely reserved to advocates under the Bar Association Act, but no ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Reservation of legal activities is a Member-State competence; no EU rule or CJEU ruling on AI legal-services products and unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
no rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products and unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026; the general prohibition on non-advocates practising under sections 29 to 33 of the Advocates Act 1961 has not been applied to AI tools.
International bodies · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found at international level as of 4 September 2026; unauthorised-practice regulation is national. The IBA ANLBS guide only surveys national positions.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026 on consumer-facing AI legal products and the advocacy monopoly under the Bar Association Law 1961.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026. Law 132/2025 article 13 governs AI inside regulated professions, not AI offered directly to the public.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
no rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Court representation is reserved to sworn advocates in most proceedings, but no ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Representation in most court proceedings is reserved to advocates, but no ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No Luxembourg ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal services found as of 4 September 2026. Because legal practice is licensed by professional title rather than by a mandatory bar, there is no regulator with a standing unauthorised-practice enforcement function comparable to a common-law bar.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Dutch law reserves only procesvertegenwoordiging in specified proceedings to advocaten (Advocatenwet); giving legal advice is not a reserved activity, so consumer AI legal products are not caught by a monopoly rule. No Dutch ruling or regulation on AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
no rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
The Courts of Justice Act [domstolloven] reserves legal-services provision, but no ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
CPRA Canon II, Section 35 bars delegating legal advice or opinions to a non-lawyer including a paralegal, but is drafted for persons; no Supreme Court ruling or rule extends it to AI systems.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No Polish ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal-services products and unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No AI-specific ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal services found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No AI-specific ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal services; the Code of Law Practice reserves representation to licensed lawyers.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Africa · verified 2026-09-04
No AI-specific ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal services; the Legal Practice Act 28 of 2014 reserves legal practice to enrolled practitioners.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No AI-specific ruling or regulation on consumer legal AI found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
No ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Sweden has no general reservation of legal services (non-advokat legal advisers may practise), so consumer AI legal products raise no unauthorised-practice issue; no ruling found.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Swiss law reserves only representation before courts (BGFA and cantonal rules); legal advice is not a monopoly, so consumer AI legal products are not caught. No Swiss ruling or regulation on AI legal products found as of 4 September 2026.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
Middle East · verified 2026-09-04
No AI-specific ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal services. General licensing of advocates and legal consultants by the Ministry of Justice and, in Dubai, the Legal Affairs Department, applies.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
Unauthorised practice of law is regulated exclusively by the states; no federal rule, ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services was found as of 4 September 2026. Federal consumer-protection enforcement against deceptive AI legal-services claims has proceeded under the FTC Act rather than any AI-specific rule.
Americas · verified 2026-09-04
No rule, guidance or reported case found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No rule, guidance or case on consumer AI legal services or unauthorised practice found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
No regulator ruling or guidance on consumer AI legal services as unauthorised practice was found as of 4 September 2026.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Court representation is reserved to advocates, public legal aid attorneys and licensed trial counsel [laki luvan saaneista oikeudenkäyntiavustajista]. No ruling or regulator position on consumer AI legal products was located.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Not established. The Legal Practitioners Ordinance (Cap. 159) restricts the provision of legal services, but no Hong Kong determination applying it to consumer AI legal products was located.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Not researched — the session's WebSearch budget was exhausted before this category could be checked.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
The Advocates Law reserves advocate services to admitted advocates, but no authority has applied it to AI legal tools or chatbots and no enforcement action was identified.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Circular 242/2025 names unauthorised practice of law as a generative-AI risk and says AI must not substitute for trained legal minds, but no official determination applying section 37 of the Legal Profession Act 1976 to AI products was located.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Not established. The Lawyers and Conveyancers Act 2006 reserves certain work to lawyers, but no New Zealand determination or guidance applying it to consumer AI legal products was located before the search budget was exhausted.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Not researched. Romania actively polices unauthorised practice through UNBR litigation against parallel 'bars', but no AI-specific ruling could be checked.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Not established. The Legal Profession Act 1966 reserves legal work to regulated persons, but no Singapore determination applying it to consumer AI legal products was located before the search budget was exhausted.
Europe · verified 2026-09-04
Not researched — no Slovak ruling or regulation on consumer AI legal products could be checked without search access.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Not substantiated. No Thai determination on consumer AI legal products was located.
Asia-Pacific · verified 2026-09-04
Not substantiated. No Vietnamese determination on consumer AI legal products was located.
SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Consumer AI legal services" by country, https://safelegalai.com/regulation/category/unauthorised-practice (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.
SafeLegalAI is a research publication by Cognesio LLP, not a law firm. Nothing here is legal advice, and no lawyer–client relationship arises from reading it. Rules change; always check the official document linked on each record and take advice on your own situation. 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.
France
Germany
Ireland
United Kingdom
Czechia
Japan
Türkiye
Brazil
Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Belarus
Belgium
Bolivia
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Botswana
Brunei
Bulgaria
Cambodia
Cameroon
Canada
Chile
China
Colombia
Costa Rica
Côte d'Ivoire
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Denmark
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Estonia
Ethiopia
European Union
Georgia
Ghana
Greece
Guatemala
Honduras
Iceland
India
International bodies
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Italy
Jamaica
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macao
Malta
Mauritius
Mexico
Moldova
Mongolia
Montenegro
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar
Namibia
Nepal
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Nigeria
North Macedonia
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Russia
Rwanda
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Slovenia
South Africa
South Korea
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Tanzania
Trinidad and Tobago
Tunisia
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United States
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Venezuela
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Finland
Hong Kong SAR
Hungary
Indonesia
Malaysia
New Zealand
Romania
Singapore
Slovakia
Thailand
Vietnam