Generative AI (GenAI) systems store and process client data in three distinct ways: in the model's parameters through training and memorisation, in the context window during a live session, and in knowledge databases for retrieval-augmented generation (RAG). Each mode creates different and often counter-intuitive risks to confidentiality and legal professional privilege, and each calls for specific governance responses. Drawing on the first English and American decisions to address privilege and generative AI, UK and Munir v Secretary of State for the Home Department and United States v Heppner, on the orthodox privilege authorities against which those decisions must be read, and on recent computer science research, we explain the three modes of data storage and processing in terms accessible to practitioners and analyse the legal consequences of each. We then situate the analysis within the regulatory framework governing solicitors in England and Wales and within the ordinary principles of professional negligence, arguing that the standard of effective information governance (and with it the benchmark against which negligence and misconduct will be measured) is changing. Although we write primarily for SRA-regulated practitioners, our data-governance analysis is framed to extend to any jurisdiction in which the protection of privilege or professional secrecy depends on demonstrable confidentiality. The ultimate aim of this article is to help legal services professionals understand salient data leakage risks in GenAI systems and thereby facilitate a more responsible deployment of GenAI on client data and other sensitive material.
Recent advances in large language models and programmatic CAD have significantly improved Text-to-CAD generation for individual parts. However, production-ready mechanical assembly generation remains largely unsolved. Unlike single-part modeling, assemblies require coordinated reasoning over multiple components, functional interfaces, assembly relations, engineering principles, and physical consistency. Consequently, directly generating executable CAD code is insufficient for constructing mechanically valid and reusable assemblies. We present AssemCAD, an axiom-grounded framework for production-ready CAD assembly generation from natural language. Instead of representing an assembly as monolithic CAD code, AssemCAD first constructs an axiomatic Assembly Specification consisting of typed parts, geometry-backed ports, executable mates, and engineering axioms. Each assembly relation is explicitly grounded in one or more engineering principles, making the resulting specification interpretable, reusable, and verifiable. To realize this specification, AssemCAD introduces a port- and mate-based CAD assembly library that executes symbolic assembly relations through deterministic mate transformations and validates declared interfaces using concrete B-Rep geometric evidence. Built on this representation and library, AssemCAD further supports on-demand synthesis of reusable parametric component factories for both standard and open-world geometries. Experiments on AssemBench show that AssemCAD substantially improves assembly preservation and physical validity over code-centric CAD generation baselines, while generalizing across different foundation-model backbones. By combining axiom-grounded assembly reasoning with deterministic geometric execution, AssemCAD extends Text-to-CAD from isolated part generation toward production-ready mechanical assembly design.