In 2024, the United Kingdom had a Rule of Law Index score of 0.78, compared with 0.79 between 2020 and 2022, with the UK achieving its highest score between 2016 and 2018, when it was 0.81. Declining scores since 2018 imply that adherence to the rule of law has weakened in the UK in recent years.

In 2023, lawyers from the United States, Canada, France, and the United Kingdom used generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) the most when it came to researching matters for legal purposes. When it came to developing litigation strategies, GenAI was hardly used. Almost 60 percent of lawyers in Canada used GenAI with help writing emails.

For the year ending March 2024, there were 58,612 applications to the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, also known as Clare's Law, in England and Wales. Successful applications to the scheme allow the police to disclose to someone if their partner has a history of violence or abusive behavior.

A survey conducted in April and May 2023 revealed that around ** percent of the companies that do business in the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) found it challenging to adapt to new or changing requirements of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) or Data Protection Act 2018 (DPA). A further ** percent of the survey respondents said it was challenging to increase the budget because of the changes in the data privacy laws.

Revenue is projected to climb at a compound annual rate of 1.6% to £48.9 billion over the five years through 2024-25. Recent economic headwinds, including severe inflationary pressures and geopolitical tensions, have taken a hit on consumer spending and business activity, which has limited industry growth. However, the industry is countercyclical, meaning that demand for legal work in certain areas, including litigation and insolvency matters, grows in times of economic downturn. The largest firms have responded to the challenges posed by weaker business activity in the UK by expanding internationally, engaging in M&A initiatives and broadening their services to compete with accounting firms. The introduction of legislation allowing non-legal entities to own legal firms through alternative business structures has created significant price-driven competition. Pressure on fees has encouraged firms to enhance efficiency and cut costs. Law firms have increasingly invested in technology that reduces human error and speeds up routine work, increasing the time employees have to engage in more valuable activities. Following strong growth in 2021-22 as the economy recovered from the impacts of the COVID-19 outbreak, an adverse economic climate weakened industry performance over the two years through 2023-24. Soaring inflation, steep borrowing costs and geopolitical tensions eroded business confidence and restricted business spending, with M&A activity taking a hit. Residential property transactions also dropped amid squeezed consumer finances and high mortgage rates. However, revenue is estimated to climb by 3% in 2024-25 thanks to improving economic conditions, with inflation subsiding and interest rate cuts boosting business confidence and expansionary activity. Competitive pressures and the war for talent have weighed on profit. Amid growing costs, larger firms have hiked their fees to support revenue and profit. Over the five years through 2029-30, revenue is forecast to swell at a compound annual rate of 2.8% to £56.2 billion. A more positive economic climate will drive business activity, including deal-making and IPOs, hiking demand for corporate law. The housing market is also set to expand, fuelling property law demand, while more and more organisations will seek legal advice on sustainability matters. Consolidation activity will take place as firms seek to find avenues for growth. The pace of technological advancement will quicken, with more firms attempting to enhance the efficiency of their services using artificial intelligence, blockchain and smart contracts. This will help support profit growth, though the war for talent shows no sign of slowing down.

Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, I request the following information: The number of individuals of all ages who were prescribed contraceptives in the financial years 2019-2020, 2021-2020, 2020-2021, 2021-2022 and 2022-2023 in community settings (GP surgeries and pharmacies) broken down by contraceptive method. I would also like the proportion these represent of contraception users. For example, X proportion of those on contraception are using the Mirena coil. If possible, I would also appreciate if this were broken down by age of those prescriptions too. To clarify, I mean patients. I also mean both contraceptive drugs and appliances/devices Response A copy of the information is attached. Please read the following information to ensure correct understanding of the data. Fewer than five Please be aware that I have decided not to release the full details where the total number of individuals falls below five. This is because the individuals could be identified, when combined with other information that may be in the public domain or reasonably available. This information falls under the exemption in section 40 subsections 2 and 3 (a) of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). This is because it would breach the first data protection principle as: a - It is not fair to disclose individual’s personal details to the world and is likely to cause damage or distress. b - These details are not of sufficient interest to the public to warrant an intrusion into the privacy of the individual. Please click the weblink to see the exemption in full: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2000/36/section/40 NHS Business Services Authority (NHSBSA) - NHS Prescription Services process prescriptions for Pharmacy Contractors, Appliance Contractors, Dispensing Doctors, and Personal Administration with information then used to make payments to pharmacists and appliance contractors in England for prescriptions dispensed in primary care settings (other arrangements are in place for making payments to Dispensing Doctors and Personal Administration). This involves processing over one billion prescription items and payments totalling over £9 billion each year. The information gathered from this process is then used to provide information on costs and trends in prescribing in England and Wales to over 25,000 registered NHS and Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) users. Data Source: ePACT2 - Data in ePACT2 is sourced from the NHSBSA Data Warehouse and is derived from products prescribed on prescriptions and dispensed in the Community. The data captured from prescription processing is used to calculate reimbursement and remuneration. It includes items prescribed in England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Guernsey/Alderney, Jersey, and Isle of Man which have been dispensed in the community in England. English prescribing that has been dispensed in Wales, Scotland, Guernsey/Alderney, Jersey, and Isle of Man is also included. The data excludes: • Items not dispensed, disallowed and those returned to the contractor for further clarification. • Prescriptions prescribed and dispensed in prisons, hospitals, and private prescriptions. • Items prescribed but not presented for dispensing or not submitted to NHS Prescription Services by the dispenser. Dataset - The data is limited to presentations prescribed in BNF sections 0703 Contraceptives and BNF section 2104 Contraceptive Devices. Data is presented at BNF Sub Paragraph and BNF Presentation level. Time Period - Financial years 2019/20, 2020/21, 2021/22, 2022/23 and 2023/24 (April 2023 - January 2024). Data is currently available up to and including January 2024. Organisation Data - The data is for prescribing in England regardless of where dispensed in the community. British National Formulary (BNF) Sub Paragraph and Presentation Code – The BNF Code is a 15-digit code in which the first seven digits are allocated according to the categories in the BNF, and the last eight digits represent the medicinal product, form, strength and the link to the generic equivalent product. NHS Prescription Services has created pseudo BNF chapters, which are not published, for items not included in BNF chapters 1 to 15. Most of such items are dressings and appliances which NHS Prescription Services has classified into four pseudo BNF chapters (20 to 23). Patient Identification - Where patient identifiable figures have been reported they are based on the information captured during the prescription processing activities. Please note, patient details cannot be captured from every prescription form and based on the criteria used for this analysis, patient information (NHS number) was only available for 98.28% of prescription items. The unique patient count figures are based on a distinct count of NHS number as captured from the prescription image. Patient ages are based on the age as captured from the prescription image and relates to the patient's age at the time of prescribing/dispensing. Please note it is possible that a single patient may be included in the results for more than one age band where a patient has received prescribing at different ages during a financial year. The figures for the number of identifiable patients should not be combined and reported at any other level than provided as this may result in the double counting of patients. For example, a single patient could appear in the results for multiple presentations or both financial years. Patient Age - Shows the age of the patient, if recorded. Data Quality for patient age - NHSBSA stores information on the age of the recipient of each prescription as it was read by computer from images of paper prescriptions or as attached to messages sent through the electronic prescription system. The NHSBSA does not validate, verify or manually check the resulting information as part of the routine prescription processing. There are some data quality issues with the ages of patients prescribed the products. The NHSBSA holds prescription images for 18 months. A sample of the data was compared to the images of the paper prescription forms from which the data was generated where these images are still available. These checks revealed issues in the reliability of age data, in particular the quality of the stored age data was poor for patients recorded as aged two years and under. When considering the accuracy of age data, it is expected that a small number of prescriptions may be allocated against any given patient age incorrectly. Application of Disclosure Control to information services (prescriptions) products- ePACT 2 data is not published statistics - it is available to authorised NHS users who are subject to Caldicott Guardian approval. We have no plans to apply disclosure control to data released to ePACT 2 users. These users are under an obligation to protect the anonymity of any patients when reusing this data or releasing derived information publicly. All requests that fall under the FOI process are subject to the NHSBSA Anonymisation and Pseudonymisation Standard. The application of the techniques described in the standard is judged on a case-by-case basis (by NHSBSA Information Governance) in respect of what techniques should be applied. The ICO typically rules on a case-by-case basis too so each case or challenge or appeal is judged on its own merits. FOI rules apply to data that we hold as part of our normal course of business.

As of May 2020, a survey carried out in the United Kingdom found that most Brits would not be comfortable doing many public activities if the current coronavirus lockdown restrictions were relaxed. Ten percent of respondents said they would be slightly comfortable travelling by bus after lockdown restrictions have been eased, compared to 20 percent who said they would be slightly uncomfortable. The latest number of cases in the UK can be found here. For further information about the coronavirus pandemic, please visit our dedicated Facts and Figures page.

This dataset contains the Water Environment (Water Framework Directive) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017 shellfish water protected area designations in England. These are waters designated by the Secretary of State as protected areas under the Water Framework Regulations in order to protect or develop economically significant shellfish production. The polygons are based on Ordnance Survey tidal water open data as source base data with boundary extents as originally described in the schedule to the Shellfish Waters (England) Notice 2011 (from the (now repealed) Surface Waters (Shellfish) (Classifications) Regulations 1997). Agreed changes to shellfish water protected area designations made subsequently, including the most recent review which was undertaken arising from the 2015 Designation Review for the updated River Basin Management Plans, have also been incorporated.

This dataset consists of 126 semi-structured (including 5 unstructured interviews) and a public survey to explore current understandings of legal sex/gender and attitudes towards its decertification. Decertification is used in this project to mean that people would no longer have a legal sex or gender (birth certificates, for instance, would no longer register a baby’s sex). Interviews were mostly conducted in-person prior to covid. After March 2020, they were undertaken via online platforms. The transcripts include interviews with a wide range of stakeholders exploring the implications of reform to legal sex and gender certification. Interviews also addressed organisations’ current practice in relation to the use of sex and gender categories, their response to gender identities such as agender and nonbinary, the challenges that innovation in this area face, and the question of how an identity-based approach to gender could combine with one attentive to structural gender inequalities. Predominantly semi-structured interviews were conducted with 1) Members of different publics using tailored interview methods to explore continuity, change and disruption in understandings and interpretations of gender (and its relationship to sex) across social and legal contexts; 2) public bodies, service providers, NGOs, regulatory bodies, religious communities, trade unions, legislative drafters, academics, and others working in related fields. A number of interviews were carried out for this research project that have not been archived. This is for several reasons, including in a few cases technological failure. However, one recurrent reason for non-archiving relates to the inability of organisational interviews to be sufficiently anonymised and the currently contentious nature of gender/ sex law reform discussions. In some cases, despite giving initial permission to archive when the interview was carried out, interviewees subsequently requested that their interview not be archived. The dataset also consists of a survey which explores wider public perceptions of reforming legal sex and gender. The ‘Attitudes to Gender’ survey was conducted as part of the ‘implications for the wider public’ strand of the Future of Legal Gender research project and focused on asking questions to gain a better understanding of what legal sex and gender status means for people, and whether it matters to individuals in their everyday lives. The survey ran from October to December 2018 in partial overlap with the UK Government’s public consultation on potential reform of the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA) in England and Wales. We chose to develop the survey questionnaire ourselves rather than use pre-existing measures so we could ensure the survey mapped well onto the overall aims and objectives of the project. Sampling was opportunistic. We received 3101 usable responses to the survey. Some demographic data was collected and analysed (e.g. age, class, ethnicity, sexual preference, religion) but removed from this SSPS data set for anonymity purposes.

This dataset was created through an anonymous survey of solicitors in England and Wales, conducted between 12 November 2019 and 13 January 2020. Respondents answered a series of questions regarding their use of AI technology, as well as their training for and attitudes to the use of technology in their work. After discarding partial responses, the dataset comprises a total of 353 valid responses.

The proposed research will explore the potential and limitations of using artificial intelligence (AI) in support of legal services. AI's capabilities have made enormous recent leaps; many expect it to transform how the economy operates. In particular, activities relying on human knowledge to create value, insulated until now from mechanisation, are facing dramatic change. Amongst these are professional services, such as law.

Like other professions, legal services contribute to the economy both through revenues of service providers and through benefits provided to clients. For large business clients, who can choose which legal regime will govern their affairs, UK legal services are an export good. For small businesses and citizens, working within the domestic legal system, UK legal services affect costs directly. Yet unlike other professions, the legal system has a dual role in society. Beyond the law's role in governing economic order, the legal system is more fundamentally a structure for social order. It sets out rules agreed on by society, and also the limits of politicians' ability to enact these rules.

Consequently, the stakes for AI's implementation in UK legal services are high. If mishandled, it could threaten both economic success and governance more generally. Yet if executed effectively, it is an opportunity to improve legal services not only for export but also for citizens and domestic small businesses. Our research seeks to identify how constraints on the implementation of AI in legal services can be relaxed to unlock its potential for good.

One major challenge is the need for 'complementary' adjustments. Adopting a disruptive new technology like AI requires changes in skills, training, and working practices, without which the productivity gains will be muted. We will investigate training and educational needs for lawyers' engagement with technology and programmers' engagement with law. With private sector partners, we will develop education and training packages that respond to these needs for delivery by both universities and private-sector firms. We will investigate emerging business models deploying AI in law, and identify best practice in governance and strategy. Finally, we will compare skills training and technology transfer in the UK with countries such as the US, Hong Kong and Singapore, and ask what UK policymakers can learn from these competitors. To the extent that these issues are also faced by other high-value professional services, these parts of our results will also have relevance for them.

However, the dual role of the legal system poses unique challenges that justify a research package focusing primarily on this sector. There are constitutional limits to how far law's operation can be adjusted for economic reasons: we term this second constraint 'legitimacy'. We will map how automation in dispute resolution might trigger constitutional legal challenges, how these challenges relate to types of dispute resolution technology and types of claim, and use the resulting matrix to identify opportunities for maximum benefit from automation in dispute resolution.

A third constraint is the limits of technological possibility. AI systems rely on machine learning, which reaches answers by identifying patterns in very large amounts of data. Its limitations are the size of the datasets needed, and its inability to provide an explanation for how the answer was reached. This poses particular difficulties for law, where many applications require or benefit from reasons being given. We will explore the possibility for frontier AI technologies to deliver legal reasoning.

The research will involve a mix of disciplinary inputs, reflecting the multi-faceted nature of the problem: Law, Computer Science, Economics, Education, Management and Political Economy. Working closely with private-sector partners will ensure our research benefits from insights into, and testing against, real requirements.

This statistic displays the number of abortions that were legally performed on residents of England and Wales from 2000 to 2022. The number of abortions performed in England and Wales has had slight fluctuations since 2000. In 2000 there were 175,542 performed in England and Wales, by 2022 there were nearly 252 thousand abortions performed in England and Wales.

The main project aims were to examine the human rights implications of rapidly developing technologies. As noted above, in an increasingly digitised world, technological developments and the collection, storage and use of 'big data' pose unprecedented challenges for the protection of human rights. The aim of the project was to examine the intersection of such technological developments and the ideals of human rights protection. The work focused on both positive and negative aspects of this relationship. As noted above, the core research aims were organised on these issues that cut across the threats and opportunities:1) How is the use of ICT and big data shaping the content and scope of rights? (2) How does the use of ICT and big data shape operational practices across state and non-state activities? What new theoretical questions and implications for human rights are generated? (3) What methodologies are needed to identify and document the misuse of modern technologies and the failure to comply with rights-based obligations? (4) How can the use of ICT and big data best support evidence-based approaches to human rights protection and advocacy? (5) What possibilities and limitations exist for regulating the collection, storage and use of ICT and big data by states and non-state actors? The deposited data largely focuses on interviews with law enforcement and security agency representatives about uses of digital technology. We found that an enthusiastic embrace of technnology often existed yet this was not always accompanied by the development of codes of practice, regulatory frameworks and operational guidence on how they should be used. In addition to a potential regulatory vacuum, such disconnects also placed additional burdens on law enforcement themselves as they sought to apply existing rules and regulations. This is something we have described in publications as 'surveillance arbitration'. We also include interviews with civil society actors and lawyers that interrogate these issues and associated digital rights campaigning matters in more detail.

14 semi-structured interviews conducted with legal services professionals in England over the period 2019-20. Interviewees were drawn from law firms, legal technology companies, law libraries, and legal data providers. The interviews explored in what ways does a lack of appropriate educational provision currently present a barrier to (a) law firms in adopting new technologies, and (b) computer scientists in proceeding efficiently within the rule of law; and how might this need best be addressed to allow those working in these sectors to interact innovatively and efficiently?

Legal aid spending in Scotland amounted to approximately 149.9 million British pounds in 2023/24, compared with 133.6 million pounds in the previous reporting year.

(:unav)...........................................