Speech by the Master of the Rolls to the LawTech UK Conference 2025

CivilMaster of the RollsSir Geoffrey VosNewsSpeeches

Sir Geoffrey Vos, Master of the Rolls and Head of Civil Justice, delivered the keynote speech on Wednesday 12 March to the LawTech UK Conference 2025.

The speech, at Mansion House in London, can be read below.

Introduction

  1. It is a pleasure to have been invited to speak at the first LawtechUK conference here at Mansion House. I have been a member of the LawtechUK Panel since its inauguration in 2018, when the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (which I chair) was also established as one of several taskforces working under the LawtechUK umbrella. Both LawtechUK and the UKJT have come a long way, but I believe that they still have much further to go. Let me explain.
  2. The LawTech industry is still in its infancy here in Europe, yet it seems to have matured and taken flight in the US. Now, more than ever, we need to support UK initiatives to utilise AI and machine learning in the delivery of legal services and, perhaps even more importantly, to find ways to unlock international digital trading.
  3. LawtechUK’s objective is to educate and provide initiatives that will grow the UK’s LawTech market and enhance the UK’s position as one of Europe’s leading LawTech jurisdictions. The global LawTech market was approaching $30 billion last year. Much of that is centred in the US, but the UK has all the ingredients to make it a serious competitor.
  4. The UK has English law that we know is the law of choice for trillions of dollars of insurance, transportation, financial services and banking contracts worldwide. The UK has the Commercial Court, the Business and Property Courts and London arbitration that remain as popular as ever. We have recently enacted the Arbitration Act 2025 that will enhance London as one of the most globally attractive arbitral seats. And the UK has 8 of the top 20 international law firms by income. All of the world’s top 50 law firms have offices in London. The UK is home to 350 LawTech corporations, and UK legal services contributed £37 billion to the UK economy last year.
  5. This morning, I want to talk a bit about what the UKJT has already done and what the UKJT is planning to do in the next year. Then I shall say something about the importance of Lawtech UK more generally. First, then, the UKJT:

The UKJT’s existing work products

  1. You will all know that the UKJT has published three ground-breaking Legal Statements aimed at clarifying the law. The aim is to remove private law legal impediments that exist to the adoption of new technologies.
  2. In November 2019, the UKJT published its legal statement on the status of cryptoassets and smart contracts under English private law. That made clear that cryptoassets were property in English law and that smart contracts were capable of being legally binding contracts. The Legal Statement gave a much needed fillip to the legal infrastructure underpinning the mainstream adoption of digital assets beyond the devotees of Bitcoin. It was followed by the Law Commission’s report on Digital Assets on 28 June 2023 and now by the Property (Digital Assets etc) Bill that is proceedings through the House of Lords. The Bill is refreshingly short: two clauses only. The operative clause reads:
    A thing (including a thing that is digital or electronic in nature) is not prevented from being the object of personal property rights merely because it is neither— (a) a thing in possession, nor (b) a thing in action.
  3. In February 2023, the UKJT published a legal statement on the issuance and transfer of digital securities under English private law, which addressed the critical question of whether equity, debt or other securities could be validly issued and transferred under English law using blockchain systems.
  4. In April 2024, the UKJT released its third legal statement, focusing on digital assets and English insolvency law. This statement was particularly timely given the increased turbulence in the digital asset markets and the high-profile collapse of a number of digital asset exchanges, platforms, and funds. The statement provided essential guidance on the application of English insolvency law to digital assets.
  5. Equally importantly, in 2021, the UKJT published its digital dispute resolution rules (the DDRRs) that have been widely adopted. The DDRRs provide for expedited arbitrated or expert dispute resolution under English law, with decisions capable of implementation directly on-chain using a private key. The rules also allow for the optional anonymity of the parties.

The UKJT’s new projects: (1) Control in relation to third category digital assets

  1. The UKJT now has three new projects. First, it has been asked by the Government to do what the Law Commission recommended in its report on Digital Assets that I have already mentioned. The UKJT has established an expert group under the chairmanship of Lord Justice Zacaroli to produce non-binding guidance on the legal concept of ‘control’ in relation to third category digital assets. The work is intended to facilitate the development of the common law and will be vital in providing the market confidence needed for the adoption of English law in transactions involving digital assets. It was a feather in the cap of the UKJT to be asked to undertake this work on the basis that it had “established itself as an internationally credible voice at the intersection of the law and technology”.

The UKJT’s new projects (2) Liability for harms caused by AI

  1. UKJT’s second current project concerns AI. I have thought for some time that the sector was in need of reassurance as to the ability of English law to provide redress for harms caused by AI. The UKJT will produce a fourth legal statement on this topic, also with an eye to whether or not statutory intervention or underpinning is required. The focus will be on harms caused to third parties and whether the existing law of torts can adequately respond.
  2. There are three reasons why such a legal statement is needed.
  3. First, projects having similar objectives have been launched in both the EU and the US.
  4. The EU has obviously already legislated in its AI Act, but it is also now working on its AI Liability Directive. The new Directive’s main provision would introduce a “presumption of causality”. The idea would be, in effect, to reverse the private law burden of proof and to put in place a rebuttable presumption that there is a causal link between non-compliance with a duty of care under EU or national law on the one hand and “the output produced by the AI system that gave rise to damage” on the other hand. The presumption of causality would kick in when the claimant shows that (a) the breach caused some damage, and (b) it is reasonably likely that the alleged negligence has influenced the AI output or lack of output that caused the damage.
  5. In October 2024, the American Legal Institute launched a project aimed at creating Principles of the Law, Civil Liability for Artificial Intelligence. So, it is certainly time for the UK to make sure that English law is not left behind.
  6. The second reason for starting work immediately on the UKJT’s AI liability legal statement is that there are multiple calls in the UK for the uses of AI to be regulated and for legislation to create new liabilities for its use. It would obviously be useful for Government to have a reliable legal backdrop against which to consider those calls.
  7. Finally, and perhaps this is the strongest justification, the UKJT thinks that there is genuine market uncertainty about how and when developers of AI tools and those that utilise them might incur legal liability when things go wrong. Market uncertainty has been the backdrop to each of the three existing legal statements and provides a strong rationale for embarking on this new legal statement on civil liability for harms caused by AI.

The UKJT’s new projects (3) The International Jurisdiction Taskforce

  1. The third and perhaps the most exciting project on which the UKJT is embarking is the formation of an International Jurisdiction Taskforce or IJT. The idea would be to bring together some of best legal thinkers in the digital space from the main private law jurisdictions around the world, with a view to understanding how much common ground exists between their approaches to digital assets and digital trading. It seems to me, at least, that private law is key to the mainstream and wholesale adoption of digital assets and digital trading. If different jurisdictions have different positions on the status of cryptoassets or as to ability to securitise digital assets or their treatment on insolvency, complex and unpredictable private international law issues will arise. More importantly, the likelihood of market uncertainty will be exacerbated. The idea is not to boil the ocean, nor to replicate what UNIDROIT and UNCITRAL have done so effectively. Instead, it is to start the process of seeing whether some level of private law alignment can be achieved between the laws applicable in the most commonly chosen commercial jurisdictions. New York law, English law, Singapore law, Dubai law and French and German law might be a suitable starting point. I hope that I will be able say something more about this concept before too long.

The continuing rationales for LawtechUK and the UKJT

  1. Before concluding this short speech, I would like to suggest three short, but important rationales for the LawtechUK adventure. These are my reasons for saying what I said at the start, namely that Lawtech UK and the UKJT still have a long way to go. They can achieve so much more.

The Legal Sector is the UK’s USP

  1. When we started the Lawtech Panel, as it was then called, the idea was to remove impediments to the adoption of tech solutions in the delivery of legal services and dispute resolution. That was before it was clear that AI was going to transform the working practices of lawyers, judges, arbitrators and mediators. As I said a few minutes ago, the legal services industry is worth billions to the UK economy. But it is only a small part of the professional services industry more generally. TheCityUK reported at the end of 2024 that the UK’s trade surplus in the financial and related professional services sector was £100.7 billion. That is a big figure and provides growth opportunities that have yet to be fully understood, let alone realised.
  2. It is now fashionable to say how important English law and the UK legal sector is to the economy, but I find that it is less common to find a specific diagnosis of what needs to be done to translate what is already a success story into the world’s leading jurisdiction with all the economic advantages that that would provide. The legal sector is truly the UK’s USP because we have here a judiciary of undoubted integrity and lawyers respected the world over.

AI will transform the legal sector

  1. I remember, in early Lawtech Panel speeches, spouting the prediction that, within 5 years, there would be more than 3 trillion smart contracts every year. We need to review these predictions frequently as we begin to see how tech is really going to change our economic realities.
  2. It is now clear, I think, that generative AI and digital trading are likely to affect the legal sector fundamentally. That gives LawtechUK a special importance. It is one thing for the UK to sport 350 lawtech companies, but it is another to produce the legal and regulatory environment that fosters innovation in the delivery of legal services and in dispute resolution. LawtechUK operates in this latter space.
  3. The idea, when it was born, was to bring together, lawyers, judges, tech companies and tech experts to promote the Lawtech sector and, perhaps, to shake the law out of a little complacency.
  4. LawtechUK should be seen alongside the creation of the Online Procedure Rules Committee, the Digital Justice System and the initiatives that are inspiring lawyers to make practical valuable use of AI systems to improve and reduce the costs of the legal services they provide for their clients.

LawtechUK can lead the world

  1. In many other countries in Europe and beyond, we can observe what may come to be regarded as excessive caution about embracing tech and AI into the law. LawtechUK can be an example to the world in unlocking the economic advantages of digital trading, digital legal services and online dispute resolution.
  2. I hope that you find this conference inspiring and informative.