What are the key projects that you have been involved in over the past twelve months?

Over the past year, I have focused on enabling OpenX’s international growth while overseeing privacy compliance across EMEA and APAC and managing corporate matters in those regions.

A key corporate project was leading the legal workstream for establishing a new subsidiary. Acting as project lead, I coordinated internal stakeholders and external counsel where required to deliver a compliant, scalable set-up – covering entity formation, governance foundations, and alignment with group-level policies – so the business could operate efficiently while managing local legal risk.

On the privacy and product side, I partnered closely with product and engineering teams on the international expansion of a user graph capability built from ad request data. My role was to embed privacy-by-design throughout the product lifecycle, including legal basis analysis, data minimisation, retention strategy, transparency requirements, and assessment of DSAR implications. I also supported the commercial and operational readiness of the initiative through vendor/partner terms and contractual controls designed to reflect the underlying data governance decisions.

In parallel, I drove core privacy compliance deliverables across EMEA and APAC, including DPIAs and risk assessments for new product features and data uses, enhancements to consent/opt-out approaches, and strengthening vendor diligence practices. I also supported audit and incident-response readiness by helping put in place clearer processes, documentation, and accountability – aimed at ensuring the organisation can move quickly without losing discipline around compliance and risk management.

What are the key trends that in-house counsel should be monitoring in 2026?

In my view, in-house legal teams – particularly in technology and advertising – should closely monitor three areas in 2026. First, privacy enforcement and regulatory scrutiny are likely to remain intense, with continued focus on advertising-related processing and the accountability expectations placed on complex data ecosystems.

Second, organisations will need to keep strengthening practical compliance around user choice mechanisms (including consent/opt-out implementation), transparency, and vendor-chain controls, as regulators and counterparties increasingly look beyond policy language to how controls operate in practice.

Third, the rapid adoption of AI across business functions (including legal) will continue to create both efficiency opportunities and governance challenges, requiring clear internal rules on acceptable use, data handling, and quality assurance.

AI is increasingly being integrated into legal teams to maximise efficiency. How can in-house counsel ensure the successful incorporation of these tools without compromising the human element?

In my view, the successful use of AI in legal teams depends on governance, training, and disciplined workflows. AI can add value in well-defined areas – such as first-pass drafting, summarisation, and issue spotting – provided there are guardrails around confidentiality, privilege, and data security, and provided outputs are always subject to human review. To preserve the “human element”, legal teams should treat AI as a way to reduce time spent on repetitive tasks and increase capacity for higher-value work: stakeholder management, negotiation strategy, and nuanced risk judgment. Clear policies, role-based access, and a culture of accountability are what allow teams to adopt AI responsibly while maintaining professional standards.