"AI offers opportunities to resolve complex rent and disrepair disputes far more quickly and economically than was possible in past times. We should embrace those opportunities and available new technologies in order to provide the access to justice that so many tenants and occupiers have long sought and have long found to have eluded them.”

“It would then appear that on 18/5/25, on father’s case …, or perhaps even earlier in 2025 …, he formed the view that the mother was having an affair. He had access to her ChatGPT account, which I confess was new to me. This was explained to me as effectively analogous to one person having remote access to another person’s internet search history…”

“In considering the Respondent’s grounds of appeal, the tribunal noted that the Respondent relied on a number of cases. However, on close scrutiny, the tribunal was unable to find some of the cases that were referenced. Further the tribunal found that in a number of the cases quoted, incorrect references were used and in many of the cases the tribunal did not recognise the case summary provided...The tribunal is aware of the growing use of artificial intelligence and it would appear that an AI tool was used to prepare the Respondent’s grounds of appeal. This has resulted in the tribunal’s resources being disproportionately engaged in order to consider the cases relied on by the Respondent.”

“…He is genuinely seeking to assist a claimant who would otherwise be unrepresented. Nonetheless, it is important that some basic checks are done to ensure that the material put before the Tribunal is accurate in order to avoid the above. I refer to R (on the application of Ayinde) v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 which clearly identifies the risk of not undertaking such checks and the importance of doing so…” Employment Judge J Connolly

"I then typed the same wording into M365 Copilot on an Android device but adding a question mark at the end which gave a similar response, although the phrasing was markedly different, and it referred to the Upper Tribunal decision cited by [landlord’s managing agent] rather than the ‘hallucinated’ Court of Appeal citation. Repeating the same question sometime later would not re-produce reference to the Upper Tribunal decision, showing that AI adapts and an earlier answer may no longer be returned as the algorithm learns, demonstrating the care that needs to be taking in using AI. The idiom ‘shifting sands’ comes to mind.”
Judge D Gethin

All legal representatives are responsible for the material they put before the court/tribunal and have a professional obligation to ensure it is accurate and appropriate. Provided AI is used responsibly, there is no reason why a legal representative ought to refer to its use, but this is dependent upon context.

Until the legal profession becomes familiar with these new technologies, however, it may be necessary at times to remind individual lawyers of their obligations and confirm that they have independently verified the accuracy of any research or case citations that have been generated with the assistance of an AI chatbot.

“… if they used a generative AI program, they have been fooled. Such programs often sound persuasive but can be fatally flawed. Sadly, in this case the argument was indeed fatally flawed. The general public should be warned against the use of generative AI devices and programs in matters of law…”