The Chief Justice has today issued a new Practice Direction on the use of artificial intelligence (AI).
The Practice Direction has been developed by the Courts’ AI Committee, and been informed by internal and external consultation.
Purpose
The Practice Direction provides guidance on the responsible use of AI by all court users, including parties, lawyers and private experts. It is designed to:
- maintain public confidence in court processes
- ensure any use of AI is based on principles of integrity, accuracy, accountability, compliance with professional obligations, confidentiality and safety
- ensure that the use of AI is consistent with the proper administration of justice.
Noting that AI is developing quickly, this Practice Direction will be adapted over time.
Key principles
The Practice Direction establishes overarching principles governing any use of AI in proceedings. Court users must ensure that any use of AI is:
- accurate and independently verified
- accountable
- consistent with professional and legal obligations, including duties to the Courts
- consistent with confidentiality and data security requirements
- used in a way that does not compromise safety, including the safety of children and other court users.
Responsibilities of court users
The Practice Direction makes clear that all court users remain responsible for material they prepare, file or rely upon in proceedings, regardless of whether AI has been used to assist in its preparation.
Court users must:
- verify and proofread any AI‑generated content
- ensure references to legislation, case law and other sources are accurate and exist
- adapt material to the Australian legal context
- ensure that evidence and other material is authentic and not altered or generated in a misleading way.
Court users should also be able to explain, if required, whether and how AI has been used, including what tool was used and how outputs were reviewed.
Expert Reports
The Practice Direction specifically addresses the use of AI in relation to expert evidence.
- Experts engaged in proceedings must comply with the Practice Direction in preparing their reports or opinions.
- Lawyers who engage private expert witnesses must provide them with a copy of the Practice Direction, and ensure the expert certifies that they have read the Practice Direction.
Confidentiality and sensitive information
The Practice Direction highlights the risks associated with entering confidential or sensitive information into AI systems, particularly publicly available tools.
Court users must:
- comply with confidentiality obligations, orders and legislation that protects certain kinds of information
- avoid entering sensitive information into public AI tools
- understand how AI systems store and use data before use.
Consequences of misuse
The Courts may respond to inappropriate use of AI by:
- disregarding material
- making costs or other orders
- referring matters to a regulatory body.
Issues concerning the improper use of AI should be raised with the presiding judicial officer where they may affect the integrity of proceedings.
