Archive for category: AI & Justice Reform

You are here: / / / / AI & Justice Reform

How is artificial intelligence changing legal research, court documents and access to justice?

Read JSH Law analysis of AI accuracy, confidentiality, evidence handling, automated decision-making and practical safeguards for family proceedings.

Explore what legal technology may help with, what it cannot reliably decide and why source checking and human oversight remain essential.

These articles combine legal-process commentary with guidance for responsible use by litigants in person.

JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

A Human in the Loop Is Not Enough: “Humanwashing”, AI and the Future of Judicial Decision-Making

/
0 Comments
A major 2026 study found that putting a human judge back into an AI-assisted decision can largely eliminate the perceived fairness gap — even where the human review is minimal. JSH Law examines the risk of “humanwashing”, automation bias and what meaningful judicial oversight should actually require.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

If AI Does the Junior Work, Who Trains the Lawyers of 2035?

/
0 Comments
Artificial intelligence is automating many of the tasks traditionally used to train junior lawyers. If clients will no longer pay for repetitive processing, the profession must become much more deliberate about teaching judgment, ethics, strategy and client counselling.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

AI Has Helped Win a UK Court Case — But It Is Not the Story Some Headlines Suggest

/
0 Comments
Garfield AI’s reported court success is a genuine legal technology milestone — but not because AI replaced a lawyer in court. The real significance is more practical: regulated AI may help ordinary people and small businesses pursue claims that would otherwise be too expensive to bring. This article explains what the case really means, why it is not a binding legal precedent, and why family lawyers and litigants in person should pay close attention.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

Pathfinder Is Failing Children: What Litigants in Person Are Really Seeing Inside the Family Courts

/
0 Comments
Cafcass and Pathfinder are being promoted as major reforms in private family law. But many litigants in person say children are still being failed by delay, weak safeguarding, poor analysis, and a system under pressure.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mazur, AI, and the Future of Legal Support | JSH Law

/
0 Comments
Mazur defines the legal boundaries. AI expands capability. Together, they are reshaping how legal support works.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

The “Vibe Lawyer” Moment: AI, Litigants in Person, and the Coming Shockwave for the Family Courts

/
0 Comments
Artificial intelligence is entering UK courtrooms at scale. This article examines the risks, opportunities and judicial warnings surrounding AI use by litigants in person — and how to use it responsibly in family proceedings.
JSH Law Resources and Guidance for Litigants in Person – practical family court information explained in plain English.© 2026 JSH Law Ltd. All rights reserved.

When Court Data Disappears: Why Transparency in Family Courts Matters More Than Ever

/
0 Comments
The Ministry of Justice’s decision to delete archived court data has raised significant questions about open justice, AI governance and transparency. This article examines what the controversy means in practical terms for family court users and litigants-in-person navigating delay, safeguarding disputes and systemic opacity.