Artificial intelligence (AI) tools are increasingly being used across professional services, including the legal profession. From drafting submissions to summarising case law and preparing chronologies, AI can offer efficiency and convenience. However, recent court decisions and practice directions make it clear that the use of AI in legal drafting carries serious risks if not handled carefully. Lawyers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, integrity, and confidentiality of all material filed in court regardless of whether AI was used in its preparation.
This article outlines the key risks identified by the courts, the legal duties that continue to apply, and why caution is essential when using AI in family law proceedings.
AI-Generated Errors and the Risk of Misleading the Court
A significant example of the risks associated with AI use was considered in Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166. In that matter, AI was used to generate a list of legal authorities and summaries that were provided to the Court without proper verification.
The result was serious:
- The cited authorities did not exist, and
- The summaries generated by the AI were inaccurate.
The Court used the case to highlight the fundamental duty owed by legal practitioners not to mislead the Court, whether deliberately or inadvertently. The fact that the errors originated from AI did not reduce the responsibility of the lawyer who filed the material.
The message from the Court was clear: AI is not a substitute for professional judgment, verification, or ethical responsibility.
Confidentiality and Family Law Restrictions
In family law matters, the risks extend beyond accuracy.
Under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), strict confidentiality provisions apply. Section 114Q prohibits the publication or communication of information that identifies:
- a party to the proceedings,
- a witness, or
- a person associated with the matter.
There is a real risk that uploading draft court documents into an AI platform could:
- breach statutory confidentiality obligations,
- breach undertakings given to the Court, or
- breach rules relating to subpoenaed material.
This concern has been reinforced by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which issued Practice Note SC Gen 23 – Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (28 January 2025).
That Practice Note prohibits entering certain material into generative AI systems, including:
- information subject to suppression or non-publication orders,
- material covered by the Harman undertaking,
- documents produced under subpoena, and
- material subject to statutory publication restrictions.
The responsibility rests squarely on the individual using the AI tool to ensure confidentiality and compliance with all legal obligations.
Ongoing Duties When Using AI
The courts have made it clear that existing professional duties apply fully, even where AI is used as a drafting aid.
In practical terms:
Verifying authorities
If AI is used to identify case law or legal authorities, the lawyer responsible for the document must independently verify that:
- the cases actually exist, and
- they are accurate, current, and relevant to the proceedings.
Reviewing all AI-generated content
Where AI is used to draft submissions, prepare footnotes, or compile chronologies, the same level of scrutiny applies. All content must be checked to ensure it is:
- factually correct,
- legally accurate, and
- appropriate for filing in court.
AI may assist with efficiency, but it does not reduce professional accountability.
How James Noble Law Can Assist?
At James Noble Law, we understand the evolving role of technology in modern legal practice and the importance of using it responsibly.
Our team takes a careful, compliance-first approach to court documents, ensuring that:
- all legal authorities are properly researched and verified,
- confidentiality obligations under family law legislation are strictly observed, and
- every document filed with the Court meets the highest professional and ethical standards.
We focus on practical, well-considered legal advice and meticulous preparation, particularly in family law matters where privacy and accuracy are critical.
Conclusion on AI in Legal Drafting
AI can be a useful tool when used appropriately, but recent court decisions make it clear that unchecked reliance on AI in legal drafting can have serious consequences. Errors, fabricated authorities, and confidentiality breaches can undermine a case and expose practitioners and clients to significant risk.
Ultimately, responsibility for court documents cannot be outsourced to technology. Careful review, legal judgment, and adherence to professional duties remain essential.
If you need assistance preparing family law documents or navigating court processes with confidence and care, the team at James Noble Law is here to help.
Book your free 20-minute consultation today at jamesnoblelaw.com.au and take the first step toward a fair and equitable resolution. Find trusted Brisbane family lawyers on Google Maps or get in touch with us directly.
Helpful Family Law Documents & Guides
- A Guide to Children Negotiation and Family Law
- A Guide to Property & Family Law Act Paper
- A Guide to Alternative Dispute Resolutions
- A Guide to Preparing for the unthinkable
- A Guide to Collaborative Practice Paper
- A Guide to Separation in Family Law
- A Guide to Family Law Property
- A Guide to Dispute Resolution
- A-Z Collaborative Law eBook
- A Guide to Separation
- A Guide to Children
- Arbitration eBook
- Family law eBook
