The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has launched a consultation on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) by legal representatives in the preparation of court documents. The consultation, conducted by the CJC's 'Use of AI in Preparing Court Documents' Working Group, considers whether rules are required to regulate the use of AI in drafting pleadings, witness statements and expert reports. The working group was established at the CJC's annual strategy meeting in January 2025 and is chaired by the Deputy Head of Civil Justice, Lord Justice Birss. Its members include High Court judges, CJC members and representatives from the Bar Council and the Law Society. The consultation closes on 14 April 2026. Following the consultation, the CJC will publish a final report.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) working group has published an update on its consultation on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for the preparation of court documents. Respondents broadly considered that existing professional duties and regulatory frameworks are sufficient to regulate the use of AI in professional legal drafting. The working group identified witness statements as the principal area requiring further analysis, following concerns that AI tools may influence or reshape a witness’s evidence in a way that affects authenticity, integrity and personal recollection. It will also consider issues arising in relation to expert evidence and litigants in person, including whether proportionate transparency or disclosure requirements would assist the administration of justice. The working group will now continue its focused analysis on witness statements and prepare a draft report for the CJC, with publication of the final report expected later in 2026.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its final report on litigation funding, following a review commissioned by the Lord Chancellor in April 2024. The report recommends introducing regulation for third-party funding (TPF), which is currently self-regulated in England and Wales. The review examined TPF's impact on access to justice, regulatory options and funding effectiveness. The recommendations aim to create a more transparent framework for litigation funding, following a four-month public consultation that closed on 3 March 2025. The working party was co-chaired by Dr John Sorabji and Justice Simon Picken.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its final report on civil enforcement, following a 12 week consultation that concluded in September 2024. The report, produced by the working group chaired by HHJ Karen Walden-Smith, examines the complexity of civil enforcement processes in England and Wales and proposes recommendations for modernisation. While most of the recommendations are concerned with the enforcement of judgments, several other recommended changes would affect pre-action and the early stages of court proceedings. Master of the Rolls, Sir Geoffrey Vos, endorsed the report's recommendations, noting they align with the CJC's mission to improve accessibility and efficiency in civil justice. The CJC will review implementation progress in 12 months.

The Litigation Funding Working Group of the Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published an interim report and consultation on litigation funding. The interim report and consultation, titled 'Review of Litigation Funding', is split into seven parts: the development of third-party litigation funding in England and Wales, the development of self-regulation of third-party litigation funding, different approaches to regulation, approaches to regulation in other jurisdictions, the relationship between costs and funding, and funding options. The consultation closes on 31 January 2025 at 23.59 pm, with a full report expected to be published by summer 2025.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its phase two report on the review of Pre-Action Protocols (PAPs), outlining recommendations for reforming litigation-specific PAPs, including the Construction and Engineering (C&E) PAP. The report recommends maintaining most aspects of the C&E PAP, while proposing minor enhancements. Some of the key recommendations include making engagement with the C&E PAP mandatory, subject to limited exceptions such as the right to opt out by mutual consent, preserving the current timeframes, retaining the Protocol Referee Procedure to enforce compliance, as well as refraining from introducing a formal disclosure standard. It also recommends maintaining the existing without prejudice meeting format, which already incorporates a stocktake procedure.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published its response to the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) consultation on including claimant data on the Register of Judgments, Orders and Fines. In its response, the CJC has said that any reform that is implement needs to be consistent with the Data Protection Act 2018 and the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). The CJC has highlighted that the publication of claimant data promotes access to justice for debtors, openness and transparency. However, the CJC has highlighted several issues with the proposed reform, namely that: the consultation failed to address a situation where a claimant’s details are subject to an anonymity order; and that there must be mechanisms in place to protect vulnerable claimants.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has published a response to the Justice Select Committee’s inquiry into the Work of the County Court. The CJC welcomes the inquiry, and in the response, focuses on addressing specific questions, including the current level of delay in the County Court, the extent of any regional variations and the effect of delays, the ways that the County Court engages with litigants in person and how this could be improved, the use of technology in the County Court and how it could be used to improve the service, the effect of the court reform programme on the County Court, including the new Online Civil Money Claims service and the Damages Claims service, the current level of fees, the approach taken to costs and how the fees collected are used, current procedural mechanisms to resolve disputes, the quality of data available, and future reforms to be considered.

The Civil Justice Council (CJC) has adopted revised Terms of Reference for its Futures Group following its February 2026 Strategy Meeting. The revised remit strengthens the Group’s focus on horizon scanning and analysing developments likely to shape the future of civil justice, particularly in relation to digital justice and Artificial Intelligence (AI). The Group will examine how emerging technologies may affect the volume and nature of civil claims, dispute resolution processes and litigation behaviour, and will consider the procedural, ethical and evidential implications of digital and AI-enabled systems.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) Advocate General Andrea Biondi has delivered an opinion in Case C-802/24 Reibel stating that the prohibition on satisfying claims by Russian entities under Council Regulation 833/2014 forms part of European Union public policy. The opinion, delivered on 26 February 2026, establishes that national courts must ensure arbitration awards comply with this prohibition and set aside awards that breach it, acting of their own motion if necessary. The case arose from a 2015 contract between a Belgian company and Russian entity where EU restrictive measures prevented performance, leading to a 2021 Swedish arbitration award ordering repayment of advance payments. Advocate General Biondi concluded that while arbitration proceedings concerning such claims may proceed, tribunals cannot provide favourable responses to Russian entity claims affected by restrictive measures. The opinion emphasises that arbitration tribunals remain bound by EU law and national courts must exercise effective judicial review to prevent circumvention of sanctions prohibitions.

Dispute Resolution analysis: The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) considered the interpretation to be given to article 34(2) of regulation (EC) 44/2001 (Brussels I) when dealing with the recognition of the judgments from other Member States and held that the phrase ‘proceedings to challenge a judgment’ includes applications for relief made when the original time period for making a challenge has expired. The CJEU also considered art 19(4) of regulation (EC) 1393/2007 (the Service Regulation) dealing with the application for relief and held that it should be interpreted so as to exclude national law provisions after the time for making a challenge has expired.

The Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has annulled the European Commission's exclusion of the manufacture of aircraft intended for private or commercial business aviation from the EU taxonomy's category of transitional activities. In Dassault Aviation v Commission, Case T-77/24, the court found that Dassault Aviation had an interest in challenging the measure because it was required to report its business aircraft manufacturing activities as not aligned with the taxonomy, which could affect its access to funding.