AI is moving quickly into legal work: global corporate investment more than doubled in 2025, from US$253.25 billion to US$581.69 billion, and by September that year 61% of lawyers surveyed by LexisNexis said they used AI in their daily work.

In real estate practice, AI can review titles and leases, compare drafts, extract information, prepare first drafts and reports, proofread documents and search precedent banks, giving lawyers more time for risk analysis, negotiation and client advice.

The case for property law is to use AI as support, not a substitute: solicitors remain responsible for their advice and professional duties.

That means firms and lawyers must supervise AI, assess whether its output is competent and accurate, protect client confidentiality and guard against automation bias that could undermine independent advice.

The risks are concrete: AI can fabricate legal authorities or quotations, with suspected hallucinations in Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey and Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank prompting concerns about contempt proceedings and regulatory action; the Solicitors Regulation Authority also highlighted misuse in an August 2026 warning notice.

Client information requires particular care, because uploading it to AI systems without understanding data handling, prompt retention, access and contractual protections can breach confidentiality or waive legal privilege; a 2026 Upper Tribunal comment warned about confidential documents being uploaded to open-source AI tools.

There is also a longer-term concern that heavy reliance on AI could deprive junior lawyers of opportunities to build interpretation and judgment, leaving them focused on oversight and procedural checks rather than work requiring human skills, as the Law Society’s February 2026 foresight report cautioned.

The Law Society of Scotland, the Law Society of England and Wales, and the Solicitors Regulation Authority have issued guidance supporting responsible AI use while stressing that solicitors cannot delegate their professional duties.

Professional standards may eventually evolve so that failing to use AI could be negligent when a reasonable and competent professional would use it, though no regulatory body has yet taken a position on that possibility.

AI can improve efficiency and consistency, but it cannot exercise professional judgment or take responsibility for advice; those remain the lawyer’s responsibility.