As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly integrated into legal practice, the conversation is beginning to shift from the risks of using AI to the potential risks of not using it. A recent statement from the U.K. Jurisdiction Taskforce suggests that, in certain circumstances, a professional could fall below the applicable standard of care by failing to use an available AI tool if a competent peer would have done so. While the statement is nonbinding, it raises an important question for lawyers everywhere: Could the decision not to use AI one day become a factor in evaluating professional negligence?

In their article for Law360, Jonny Frank and Michael Costa examine how standards of care may evolve as AI adoption becomes more widespread across the legal profession. They explore how technological competence obligations, client expectations, and emerging legal workflows may influence future malpractice claims, particularly in areas such as document review, investigations, and data-intensive matters. They also provide practical guidance on how law firms can evaluate, document, and govern AI-related decisions in a way that balances innovation, professional judgment, and defensibility.

Read the full article to learn why firms should focus less on whether AI must be used and more on establishing a thoughtful, documented process for determining when it should be considered.

If you have any questions or would like to find out more about this topic please reach out to Jonny Frank or Michael Costa.

To receive StoneTurn Insights, sign up for our newsletter.