The President of the American Association of Law Libraries, the biggest professional body in the world for the legal information sector, tells LIM about his long career as a law librarian, his “ghoulish nature” and his unique method for finding volunteers.

The CEO of the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP), Louis Coiffait-Gunn, talks to LIM about his mission to lead CILIP and the profession it supports through the many changes it’s now facing, why it shouldn’t matter that he is not, and has never been, a librarian, and how he believes AI is likely to affect the library world.

The International Association of Law Libraries (IALL) champions the profession all around the globe, supporting and encouraging the development of policy and promoting free access to legal information. LIM talked to its current President, Mark Engsberg, to find out more about the organisation; ask for his views on AI and other salient issues; and to discover how this one-time US Army lawyer went on to find his true vocation as a legal information professional.

There is no doubt that we are now in the midst of an AI-driven revolution in how organisations and their employees work with information. The power of recent GenAI and other deep learning technologies to absorb and process massive amounts of data as well as generate new information in response to natural language prompts has obvious implications for knowledge work. The current developments in more autonomous agentic AI systems alongside the commodification of large language models (LLMs) and reduced barriers to entry for application developers will drive a second wave of innovation over the coming five years. This will cause disruption for many organisations and the workers within them, but such changes seem inevitable. Preparing now to work with these technologies and the opportunities they present as well as mitigate the problems they bring is essential. The opportunities for many information professionals are significant as effectively managing data assets holds the key to competitive advantage in this rapidly changing environment. Here Dr Martin De Saulles, a technology analyst and writer (see page 123 for a review on his new book The AI and Data Revolution: Understanding the New Data Landscape), goes through some of the key points relating to the evolution of AI in relation to those who work with information.

In this article BIALL President Claire Mazer reviews the findings of the BIALL/SLS Academic Law Library Survey, which was conducted in 2024 and covered the academic year 2022/23. Claire’s article provides some analysis of the responses, while it also outlines some key themes and trends. The author would like to thank Laura Griffiths and Marilyn Clarke at IALS for their work in conducting the survey on behalf of BIALL and SLS (Society of Legal Scholars).

This article by Alex Robinson explores the ever-expanding landscape of AI tools available to law firms and offers practical strategies for their successful adoption. It emphasises the importance of upskilling teams, identifying business-specific needs, and implementing structured frameworks to evaluate and integrate AI solutions effectively. Drawing on real-world examples and industry insights, the article provides a roadmap for navigating the AI market strategically, ensuring law firms invest in the right tools at the right time to deliver meaningful results.

In this entertaining and illuminating article, based on his very well received presentation at the BIALL Conference in Birmingham, Matthew Leopold explains the role of trust in magic, the law and AI. He goes on to assert that law librarians are the guardians of truth and accuracy, so we need to be at the forefront of checking and validating the output of AI, to encourage trust in these systems.

The rise of GenAI (generative AI) tools such as ChatGPT has transformed the research environment, yet most legal researchers remain untrained in the theory, mechanics and epistemic structure of such systems. The public itself was introduced to GenAI through Generative Pre-Trained Transformer tools such as ChatGPT and Claude. Although AI is a decades-old academic discipline, it is now rapidly expanding, and LLM-based AI tools (called Legal Research AI Tools, or LRATs hereinafter, such as Lexis+ AI) sit at AI’s cutting edge within legal research. These LRATs rely on non-legal theoretical informational concepts and technologies to function. Legal researchers often struggle to understand how AI-enabled tools function, which makes effective/reliable use of them more difficult. Without proper orientation, legal professionals risk using LRATs with misplaced confidence and insufficient clarity, the implications of which will be addressed in a future article. This article, written by Ryan Marcotte, Reference, Instruction, & Scholarship law librarian at DePaul University’s College of Law in Chicago, Illinois, defines and explains AI-assisted legal research (AIALR) as a third phase of research logic following the traditional book-based legal research (BLR) and computer-assisted legal research (CALR) phases. It also introduces a definition of AI tailored for legal research, outlines key conceptual structures underpinning LRATs, and explains how they interpret human input. From this grounding, this article offers two frameworks: (1) the Five Ps Research Plan and (2) the four prompt engineering methodologies of Retrieval Augmented Generation, Few-Shot Prompting, Chain-of-Thought/Chain-of-Logic, and Prompt Chaining. Together, these frameworks equip legal researchers with the understanding and skills to plan, shape, and evaluate their research interactions with LRATs in the age of GenAI.

In this article, Jackie Hanes analyses law database usage at the University of Warwick over the last five academic years. She also brings her BIALL conference lightning talk up to date in the process, with data for the complete 2023/24 academic year.

This article by Margaret Watson, recently retired Academic Services Librarian at the Bodleian Library, is based upon her talk at the 2025 BIALL Conference in Birmingham and concerns the ethics of using generative AI in an academic law environment. Here she asks whether this is actually desirable, while also considering whether it risks undermining the originality and quality of a student’s work. She also asks if students, who will ultimately seek employment off the back of their academic achievements, should be given the chance to develop a hands-on understanding of the strengths, weaknesses and practical applications of generative AI. Finally, this piece also considers whether it is possible to resolve the perceived tension between academia and professional practice when it comes to AI and, if so, how will this be done? Incidentally, ‘never in a rain of pigs pudding’ is a Birmingham expression meaning that something will never happen.

Last year Unmind, the workplace wellbeing platform, undertook a study to assess organisational culture and performance in the legal sector in the UK and the US. It was based on responses from over 4400 participants across nine mid-size law firms. Building on the results of the survey, it quantified the financial impact of poor mental health, identified growth areas, and analysed differences in workplace wellbeing and attrition risk by gender, age and professional role. It went on to use these insights to provide high-level recommendations to support performance, mental health and innovation within the sector. Here LIM summarises some of its findings.

Generative AI tools, such as ChatGPT, have demonstrated impressive capabilities in summarisation and content generation. However, they are infamously prone to hallucination, fabricating plausible information and presenting it as fact. In the context of legal research, this poses significant risk. This paper, written by Sally McLaren and Lily Rowe, examines how widely available AI applications respond to fabricated case citations and assesses their ability to identify false cases, the nature of their summaries, and any commonalities in their outputs. Using a non-existent citation, we analysed responses from multiple AI models, evaluating accuracy, detail, structure and the inclusion of references. Results revealed that while some models flagged our case as fictitious, others generated convincing but erroneous legal content, occasionally citing real cases or legislation. The experiment underscores concern about AI’s credibility in legal research and highlights the role of legal information professionals in mitigating risks through user education and AI literacy training. Practical engagement with these tools is crucial to understanding the user experience. Our findings serve as a foundation for improving AI literacy in legal research.

This article, written by Catherine Parkin, Academic Librarian for Law, Leeds Beckett University, provides an overview of library anxiety, with specific reference to how this might manifest itself amongst law students in UK higher education. The article is a preliminary exploration intended to stimulate dialogue. It discusses several measures in place at Leeds Beckett University which could potentially alleviate library anxiety amongst students and suggests other possible solutions and areas for further research.

This article by Dr Charlotte Smith, of The National Archives, begins by articulating the importance and character of open justice. It then examines how this is evidenced in the justice system, before exploring the factors shaping its implementation within the archives. It does this through a treatment of third-party access to court records. It concludes by identifying questions that the justice system and archives might consider when developing the archival policy and practice applicable to archived court records.

This article, written by Andrew Thatcher, explores Eversheds Sutherland’s approach to integrating generative AI knowledge tools, focusing on their evaluation, onboarding and the subscription management. Rather than debating the broader implications of AI in law, the paper provides a practical account of the firm’s experience, navigating the complexities of tool selection, compliance, data security and training. It highlights the pivotal role of the Knowledge team in coordinating cross-departmental trials, managing supplier relationships and ensuring responsible use of proprietary data. The firm’s adoption of Lexis+ AI serves as a case study in balancing innovation with regulatory diligence, demonstrating how qualitative feedback and usage metrics inform ROI assessments. The article also addresses challenges in negotiating content usage rights with suppliers and underscores the importance of continuous engagement and adaptability in a rapidly evolving AI landscape. Ultimately, the paper positions generative AI not as a replacement for traditional legal resources, but as a transformative complement that demands thoughtful integration and ongoing evaluation.

The reduction in the size of print collections in law firm libraries has become a significant trend in recent years. As digital resources become more prevalent and accessible, law firms are increasingly shifting away from maintaining extensive physical collections. But just how far has this gone, why has it happened and what’s the future for print collections in law firms? With these and other questions in mind LIM put together a survey which was sent to a number of information professionals working in leading law firms. Their responses are outlined below.

This year’s BIALL Annual Conference is in Birmingham, and with a packed schedule of fascinating presentations, insights into cutting edge products, fun social events and a very underrated city to explore, it certainly looks like being a good one. Here the LIM co-editors guide you through all the things to look out for in Brum come June the 11th.