Home

Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has the potential to make significant changes to various aspects of the practice of law. It is possible that many lawyers will incorporate AI in doing legal work, one way or the other and to some degree or other, in the foreseeable future. However, while AI is a powerful tool at lawyers’ disposal, work generated by AI can contain errors, and AI has the potential to “hallucinate”, i.e. make up false information or something that does not in fact exist. In two recent court cases in Canada and the UK, the lawyers submitted to the courts case authorities that did not exist, leading the other side’s lawyers and the court to suspect that those cases had been (mis-)generated by the use of AI.

This article contains links which are only accessible by PLC subscribers. In this Insight, first published in PLC, Anna Blest and Katharine Tulloch consider the decision in Jaevee Homes Ltd v Fincham (t/a Fincham Demolition) [2025] EWHC 942 (TCC), in which the court concluded, among other things, that informal WhatsApp messages and e-mails between the parties constituted a binding construction contract.

From 1 May 2025, in respect of Hong Kong’s MPF scheme, the MPF offsetting mechanism will be abolished, meaning that employers no longer will be able to use the accrued benefits of their mandatory contributions under the Mandatory Provident Fund (“MPF”) scheme to offset employees’ severance payments (“SP”) and long service payments (“LSP”).