2408529 (Refugee): [2024] AATA 3353 – Chat GPT used for submissions

Ad/Marketing Communication

This legal article/report forms part of my ongoing legal commentary on the use of artificial intelligence within the justice system. It supports my work in teaching, lecturing, and writing about AI and the law and is published to promote my practice. Not legal advice. Not Direct/Public Access. All instructions via clerks at Doughty Street Chambers. This legal article concerns AI Law.

AI was only briefly mentioned in a recent Australian Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AATA) case, cited as [2024] AATA 3353, where it was used to assist in the applicant’s submissions.

Background

The matter involved an Indian national (‘the applicant’) seeking review of a refusal to grant him a protection visa. The applicant first arrived in Australia on a student visa and later made several unsuccessful attempts to obtain protection. He claimed fear of harm if returned to India, citing issues including an arranged marriage, alleged threats from his former in-laws, purported honour-killing risks, and a broader concern about inter-caste and interfaith relationships.

Throughout his time in Australia, the applicant maintained relationships with new partners, had children, and presented concerns about family separation should he be returned. The crucial central question before the Tribunal was whether the applicant faced a real risk of persecution or significant harm if removed to India.

After examining extensive evidence, including the applicant’s statements, country information on inter-caste/interfaith marriages, and allegations of threats, the Tribunal ultimately affirmed the decision to refuse the protection visa. In other words, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant’s fear did not meet Australia’s refugee or complementary protection criteria as set out in the Migration Act 1958.

How AI Featured in This Case

Interestingly, the applicant mentioned explicitly relying on ChatGPT. While the Tribunal dismissed the applicant’s claims, the matter stands out for its open use of AI in the submissions noted in Judgment.