Explore the vast range of titles available.

Purpose Generative artificial intelligence (Gen AI) is changing the trajectories of Banking (FinTech) and Law (RegTech/LawTech). The rate at which the technology is innovating is astounding. The ability of AI and Gen AI systems to simulate human intelligence (human thinking) and independently perform tasks and develop intelligence that is premised on its own experiences, process layers of information and continually learn and re-learn increasingly complex representations of data has resulted in improvements in “it” being able to perform complex, technical and time-consuming tasks; identify objects, people, voices and patterns; and screen for “problems” much earlier and provide solutions. This has economic, political and social benefits. The purpose of this study is to explore how Gen AI is changing the face of finance and its impact on the risks, regulatory and operational challenges faced by financial institutions in the UK. Design/methodology/approach The subject is explored through the analysis of data and domestic and international published literature. The first part of this study summarises the context of current risks and regulatory and operational issues; the discussion then moves on to explore Gen AI and how it can be embedded as part of the arsenal that financial institutions can use/are using to innovate and provide solutions to the regulatory and operational challenges they face as of August 2024. Findings It is suggested that UK financial institutions can further use Gen AI as part of their armoury of solutions to respond to the risk of financial crime and tackle the regulatory burden to achieve high levels of operational efficiency as well as promoting better customer satisfaction. Originality The work is original because, to the best of the author’s knowledge, it is the first to specifically explore how Gen AI is assisting UK financial institutions to find solutions to financial crime risk and regulatory challenges, customer satisfaction, cyberattacks and cybercrime.

Legaltech refers to the application of new technologies to the world of law, to carry out tasks that, until recently, were performed by lawyers or other personnel working in law firms. From 2015 onwards the Lawtech alternative has emerged. In this work, the concepts of Legaltech and Lawtech have been analyzed by searching the two main scientific information databases such as Scopus and Wed of Science (WoS). There has been a clear trend to use the concept of Legaltech against Lawtech. Six clear research lines have been detected from the whole of the published documents regarding these concepts. These are the related to Computer Science, Justice, Legal profession, Legal design, Law firms, and Legal Education. It is proposed to use the term Legaltech to include all technological advances in the legal field. From the point of view of opportunities, the irruption of Legaltech will be able to offer accurate legal advice to the public, reducing the price of this and on the other hand, analyze large amounts of data that law firms and legal advisors will use to improve their management and increase their productivity. In short, Legaltech and Lawtech are opening up new opportunities in the legal sector encouraging technological innovation, giving greater access to legal services, even try to achieve the goal of universal access to justice.

Should court judgments be publicly available for text and data mining purposes? This article shows that the arguments for and against access to judgments conflate different understandings of what judgments are. On one view, judgments are seen as a ‘jurisprudential’ category, whereas the other view regards them as something ‘factual’. Once it is understood that these views and the claims based on them do not fight over the same territory, it should be easier to make judgments more widely available, including for the purposes of computational analysis of judgments as bulk data. The purpose of this article is to help to clear the ground for the debate around access to judgments as bulk data and highlight some relevant considerations for the preferred licencing regime concerning judgments.