Artificial intelligence-powered legal assistants will be introduced in Crown Courts across England and Wales under government plans aimed at reducing the growing backlog of criminal cases.
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) has confirmed that the AI tools will first be tested in controlled trials before being rolled out for use by judges and legal professionals. Ministers believe the technology could help speed up court proceedings and improve efficiency across the justice system.
The announcement comes as Crown Court backlogs remain at record levels, with more than 80,000 cases waiting to be heard earlier this year — more than double the figure recorded before the Covid-19 pandemic.
Justice Secretary David Lammy is expected to formally unveil the initiative during London Tech Week, describing artificial intelligence as a key tool in modernising Britain’s justice system.
“Artificial intelligence has the power to transform how we live, work, and govern for the better,” Lammy said.
“This impact for good can be seen in our justice system – with thousands of days of admin work saved for our probation staff, and the advent of new tools which aim to cut court backlogs and deliver swifter justice for victims.”
Under the proposals, judges will gain access to an AI system capable of identifying trial-ready cases and grouping similar hearings together, helping courts make better use of limited resources and available courtroom time.
The government will also provide probation officers in England and Wales with AI software that can automatically record and transcribe conversations with offenders, reducing administrative workloads and allowing staff to focus more on frontline duties.
Pressure on the justice system has intensified in recent years, with official figures showing that thousands of Crown Court cases are already scheduled years into the future. Some trials are not expected to begin until 2028, while a small number have been listed as far ahead as 2030.
While the government argues that AI can help accelerate the legal process, the plans have sparked concerns among legal experts about accountability, transparency and reliability.
The Law Society of England and Wales has called for the results of all AI trials to be published and thoroughly assessed before wider implementation.
Ian Jeffery, Chief Executive of the Law Society, said: “We welcome the MoJ’s acknowledgement of the importance of ensuring safe and ethical use of any new tools, including AI.”
“However, for the use of AI in the Crown Court to be effective, the pilot must be thoroughly evaluated. The outcomes of these evaluations, along with the impact of AI on the justice system, should be made public.”
“While new technology should enhance access to justice, it cannot replace vital funding and additional court staff. Robust safeguards are needed to protect us all and preserve the integrity of the justice system.”
Concerns have also been raised following previous cases involving so-called “AI hallucinations”, where artificial intelligence systems generated inaccurate information.
One recent review found that an AI-generated error contributed to police reasoning for banning supporters of a football club from attending a match after software incorrectly referenced a fixture that never took place.
Despite these concerns, many legal professionals believe AI could play a useful role in handling routine administrative tasks.
Andrew Thomas KC, Vice Chair of the Criminal Bar Association, said many everyday legal processes “can be done quicker and more efficiently through the use of AI tools”.
However, he warned that proper safeguards remain essential.
“There are obvious concerns: the key is to educate judges, criminal barristers and solicitors, and investigators on the safe use of AI, so that its limitations are properly understood by all.”
“The quality of justice can never be watered down by taking risks or shortcuts.”
He added that human expertise would remain at the heart of criminal law.
“Criminal law is all about human interactions. AI tools lack the social and emotional understanding reliably to identify the significance of every piece of evidence.”
“As all lawyers know, the devil is always in the detail, and AI tools should not be used without checks and balances.”
The government insists that AI is intended to support judges, lawyers and probation officers rather than replace them, as it seeks to modernise the justice system and reduce lengthy delays for victims and defendants alike.