Lee Gluyas
Lee is a commercial dispute resolution lawyer and partner at CMS based in London. He has particular expertise in disputes arising out of IT projects, outsourcing agreements, software licenses and general commercial disputes relating to the provision of IT and telecommunications products and services.
He acts for clients across various industry sectors, including the consumer & retail, life sciences & healthcare, financial services (particularly fintech), recruitment, facilities management, automotive and energy sectors. He also has extensive experience of advising clients on disputes arising out of corporate transactions and on issues relating to fraud.
He is a solicitor-advocate with over 25 years' experience of litigation, arbitration and mediation. In addition to representing clients in legal proceedings, he advises on the renegotiation of terms of delivery and settlement of disputes by way of mediation and other processes.
He also advises clients on issues relating to the use of AI technologies, data protection, data security and claims relating to data breaches and misuse of data. He is a regular speaker at conferences on issues concerning the use, and misuse, of IT and risk management.
Practice Area
Panel
- Contributing Author
Experience
- CMS (previously Nabarro) (2014 - Present)
- DLA Piper (1994 - 2014)
Membership
- Society for Computers & Law (Chair, London Committee and Committee member, Disputes Committee)
- ITechLaw (Committee member, Disputes Committee)
4 Contributions by Lee Gluyas
PRACTICE NOTES
AI harms and civil liability in England and Wales: contractual, tortious, IP and data protection claims, parties at risk, remedies, and practical mitigation, including draft UKJT legal statement
This Practice Note on civil liability exposures linked to artificial intelligence (AI) reviews and distils the following key topics:
What is AI?
the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) legal statement on liability for harms caused by AI
what civil liability risks arise from AI?
who is exposed to a civil liability claim arising from AI use?
who might bring a civil liability claim connected to AI use?
mitigating the risk of AI-generated harms and losses
AI use and the role of dispute resolution lawyers
where to find further guidance and assistance
The matters addressed in this Practice Note are confined to issues arising within the jurisdiction of England and Wales, though developments beyond that jurisdiction are noted. For guidance on AI in the EU, see: AI (EU Law)—overview.
What is AI?
Although the term ‘AI’ is used frequently, it spans a wide array of meanings. Accordingly, when discussing AI it should be recognised that there is no single, precise, universally accepted definition of AI either within the UK or internationally...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
AI in civil litigation: duties, risks and best practice for solicitors and barristers in England and Wales
Practice Note on using artificial intelligence (AI) when conducting court proceedings
This Practice Note explores the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in litigation and is intended for contentious practitioners—solicitors and barristers—appearing in the civil courts of England and Wales. Its principal audience is dispute resolution lawyers engaged in commercial matters; nevertheless, the issues discussed may likewise be pertinent to those practising in the Family and Criminal courts. Note: in February 2026, the Civil Justice Council (CJC) published an interim report and consultation, Use of AI for Preparing Court Documents, inviting submissions from interested parties by 14 April 2026...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
AI-related civil claims in England and Wales: parties, procedural tools, evidence and experts, remedies, collective actions and ADR
Managing artificial intelligence (AI) related civil disputes
This Practice Note explains the considerations for dispute resolution lawyers managing claims that involve AI. It surveys the principal procedural questions that arise when bringing a civil claim where the dispute’s subject concerns AI technologies. It is directed at proceedings where AI sits at the heart of the dispute rather than appearing at the margins.
The distinctive aspects of adopting AI, combined with its technical character in a fast-moving landscape, create intricate litigation issues, including:
who develops it,
how it is embedded within existing systems,
its level of autonomy and capacity for self-learning/correction, and
the consequences for third parties.
Across any factual backdrop, the initial tasks in evaluating a civil claim include identifying the parties, pinpointing potential causes of action, setting out the elements needed to prove a successful claim, and assembling the evidence (factual and/or expert) that will support your client’s position, as well as material that may undermine the viability of the claim.
Further issues are likely to arise concerning jurisdiction, service, and enforcement. For an example of how these matters may unfold in practice, see the hypothetical case study in Practice Note: Managing an AI-related dispute—hypothetical case study...
Dispute Resolution
PRACTICE NOTES
Managing AI civil disputes in England and Wales: contract/tort claims, causation, case management, group actions, arbitration, disclosure and expert evidence—delivery drone case study
This Practice Note employs a hypothetical case study to illustrate both the substantive law and the procedural issues that may arise when bringing and overseeing an artificial intelligence (AI) related claim in the courts of England and Wales.
For related guidance, consult the following:
Practice Note: AI related civil liability—risks and mitigation (on types of civil litigation claim that may arise in AI scenarios)
Practice Note: Issues in managing artificial intelligence related civil claims (on procedural issues that may arise in conducting an AI-related dispute)
Artificial intelligence for dispute resolution lawyers—overview (general guidance on AI for dispute resolution lawyers)
Practice Note: Artificial intelligence (AI) resource kit (general guidance on AI across all legal practice areas)
Note
On 15 January 2026, the UK Jurisdiction Taskforce (UKJT) launched a consultation on its draft ‘Legal Statement on Liability for AI Harms under the private law of England Wales’. The consultation closes on 13 February 2026 (see: LNB News 16/01/2026 27—UKJT launches consultation on AI liability under English private law, which provides access to a copy of the draft legal statement)...
Dispute Resolution
If you expected to see yourself on this page, click here.
