Australia has witnessed its first disciplinary case involving the use of artificial intelligence in the courtroom. A Victorian lawyer, acting for a client in a family dispute, presented what appeared to be legitimate case precedents—only for the court to later discover they were AI-generated fabrications.
The revelation, made during a July 2024 hearing before Justice Amanda Humphreys, underscores the growing tension between emerging AI tools and the ethical obligations of legal practitioners.
The lawyer later admitted in court that he had used legal software powered by artificial intelligence to compile the list and had failed to verify the citations before submission. He offered an unconditional apology and reimbursed the opposing party for the wasted court costs, saying he did not fully understand how the software worked.
Although Justice Humphreys accepted his apology, she referred the matter to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner, stressing that it was in the public interest to investigate AI-related professional conduct as such tools become more common in legal work.
Following the investigation, the Board confirmed that on 19 August 2025, the lawyer’s practising certificate was varied. He can no longer operate as a principal lawyer, handle trust money, or run his own practice. For the next two years, he will work under supervision and report quarterly to the Board alongside his supervisor.
A spokesperson for the Board said the decision reinforced the need for lawyers to use AI responsibly and in line with their professional obligations.
Since this incident, over 20 similar cases have been reported in Australian courts, involving both lawyers and self-represented litigants who submitted court documents containing fake AI-generated citations.
Lawyers in Western Australia and New South Wales have also faced disciplinary referrals, while one case revealed a litigant falsely claimed to have used ChatGPT for a document that predated the tool’s release.
The Law Council of Australia’s president, Juliana Warner, warned that while AI will inevitably shape legal practice, its use must be approached with extreme caution. She emphasised that AI cannot replace a lawyer’s professional judgment or ethical duties to the court and clients.
Courts across Australia continue to treat AI-generated false citations as a serious breach, though Warner said a blanket ban on AI would be impractical and could stifle innovation and access to justice.
