Skip to content

Regulation Tracker / Other

Rules on the use of AI tools in advocacy practice (SAK Presidium Resolution 12/4/2025, as amended by 21/14/2025)

Slovak Bar Association, Presidium [Predsedníctvo Slovenskej advokátskej komory, SAK]

last revised 2025-03-31last verified 2026-09-042 versionscountry page →

RegulationIn forceConfidentialityClient consentVerification dutyCompetenceSupervisionRecord-keepingProhibition

map categories:Bar guidance on generative AIClient data in AI toolsDuty to verify AI outputClient consent and transparencyTechnological competenceSupervision of AI workMandatory AI trainingVendor due diligenceBilling for AI work

Binding Slovak Bar rules on AI in legal practice. Confidential information and personal data may enter AI tools only in one of three modes: a local on-premise tool, a GDPR Art. 28 processor with a no-training guarantee, or express informed client consent waiving confidentiality. Verification of output is mandatory; billing self-training time is barred.

Applies to
lawyers, firms
Effective
See version history
Current version
12/4/2025 · 31 Mar 2025
Last verified
04 Sept 2026
Official text
sak.sk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Uznesenie_12-4-2025_plne-znenie-k-25…

What the document requires

  • Art. 3: AI use must not compromise independence, confidentiality, professional secrecy or conflict rules; the lawyer retains full responsibility for outputs used; AI does not replace professional judgement or legal argument.
  • Art. 4: confidential information and personal data must not be entered into AI tools except in mode (a) local tool under the lawyer's exclusive control, (b) express informed client consent, or (c) a GDPR Art. 28 processor with contractual confidentiality.
  • Guidance Art. 3(3): relying on AI output without human review is impermissible; the lawyer must actively verify facts, citations, legislation and legal conclusions to avoid hallucinations. Guidance Art. 3(4): the lawyer must demonstrably train trainees and staff.
  • Guidance Art. 6: mode (c) requires cumulative minimums — DPA, chain-wide contractual confidentiality, explicit no-training policy, sub-processor transparency, encryption in transit and at rest, MFA, EEA-preferred data location, retention and deletion policies. Enterprise versions strongly recommended; beta versions barred for protected data.
  • Guidance Art. 7: mode (b) consent operates as a waiver of confidentiality under § 23(2) of the Act on Advocacy, for a named provider and specific purpose, after disclosure of data-loss, training-use, third-country-transfer and hallucination risks.
  • Guidance Art. 8: clients must be informed of AI use where it may materially affect strategy, key decisions or the fee; a lawyer must not charge the client for time spent training themselves on the tool.
  • Guidance Art. 9: firms must adopt internal AI rules; recommended controls include an approved/prohibited tool list, regular team training, an AI-use register logging tool, mode and confirmation of human verification, and updated privacy notices naming AI providers.

Version history

VersionDateWhat changedSource
12/4/2025current2025-03-31Original resolution adopted under § 75(1) of Act No. 586/2003 Coll. on Advocacy; effective 1 May 2025.official
21/14/2025 consolidated2025-11-25Amending resolution of 6 Nov 2025 adding a ten-article methodological guidance and model client clauses; published in Vestník SAK issue 87 and effective 25 Nov 2025.official

Sources

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Rules on the use of AI tools in advocacy practice (SAK Presidium Resolution 12/4/2025, as amended by 21/14/2025)" (Slovak Bar Association, Presidium [Predsedníctvo Slovenskej advokátskej komory, SAK], 12/4/2025, 2025-03-31), safelegalai.com/regulation/other/sk-sak-uznesenie-12-4-2025-ai-rules (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.

More official documents in Other