{"id":2758,"date":"2025-07-24T19:45:40","date_gmt":"2025-07-24T18:45:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/?p=2758"},"modified":"2025-08-09T22:26:08","modified_gmt":"2025-08-09T21:26:08","slug":"ai-in-the-courtroom","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/archives\/2758","title":{"rendered":"AI in the Courtroom"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\n
\n
\n

AI in the Courtroom<\/h2><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\"\"<\/a><\/figure><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n
\n

Fair Trial -v- Tech Hype<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Artificial intelligence is changing how we live; and now, it\u2019s changing how we go to court. From drafting legal documents to analysing evidence, AI tools are being used more and more in England\u2019s justice system. But is this progress, or a potential threat to fair trials?<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

What is AI being used for in court?<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

It is very likely that some lawyers are using AI to:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Draft legal submissions<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Summarise case law<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Predict outcomes based on past judgments<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Transcribe hearings (excellent use)<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Flag inconsistencies in evidence (questionable use)<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Some judges and lawyers use tools like Copilot Chat, a secure AI assistant provided by Microsoft, to help with research and writing (help is fine, reliance is not)<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Most of us lawyers, however, believe that AI is still terribly flawed when it comes to the law, and therefore should not be trusted in relation to case law, or statute. It\u2019s a useful tool, but it\u2019s definitely not human, and cannot assess the nuances in people\u2019s cases, or the relevant precedents in case law in the same way a qualified lawyer can.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

What are the risks?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

AI can be helpful, but it is, frankly, imperfect in ways that are not immediately obvious to the untrained eye, particularly in relation to the law and how it is applied. Recent cases have shown serious problems:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>In South Africa, lawyers submitted fake case law generated by AI<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>In England, the High Court warned that AI misuse could damage public trust<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>AI tools make stuff up: citing facts or cases that don’t exist.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Judges now receive official guidance on spotting AI generated submissions that contain errors or misleading information. I\u2019m not entirely sure on why they\u2019d need official guidance, given it is almost always immediately apparent when AI has been used. The language is a little odd, and not in line with common parlance, so it is genuinely easy to spot in most cases, and should be extremely easy for a trained lawyer to spot when viewing a submission created by AI.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

Who\u2019s responsible?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Legal professionals are still fully accountable for what they submit to court, even if AI helped write it. That means:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Lawyers using such tools really must verify all the facts and citations – so much so, that they may as well do their own research the old fashioned way in the first place!<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Lawyers cannot blame the AI if something goes wrong<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>I cannot imagine a lawyer (none I know anyway) doing so, but uploading confidential client date to public AI platforms in order to get case law and citations will be a breach of privacy rules.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

What safeguards are in place?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The judiciary is adapting:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Judicial Guidance (2025) outlines how judges should handle AI generated content (it’s likely to be a breach of any lawyer’s code of conduct if they use AI submissions that are false in court)<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Courts are encouraged to scrutinise unfamiliar citations and persuasive but flawed arguments<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Ethical standards are being updated to reflect AI risks<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>There is also talk of creating independent bodies to assess AI tooks before they’re used in legal practice (overkill, a lawyer should be able to determine their own use of such tools without yet another independent body interferring).<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

What should Lawyers and litigants do?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, frankly, lawyers shouldn\u2019t be using it if they cannot understand the basic premise that they will be responsible for the wrong output if they submit it to court. LiPs need to understand that AI cannot replace a lawyer, not yet, maybe not ever. Therefore, they should:<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n

\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Treat it like any other tool: understand its limits and verify its output<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Don’t rely on it blindly: AI can’t replace legal judgment or ethical responsibility<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Stay informed: read the latest guidance and case law on AI use<\/span><\/div>\n\n\n\n
<\/path><\/svg><\/span>Protect your own and clients’ data: use secure platforms and avoid uploading sensitive information to public tools.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\n
\n

Final Thoughts<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n

AI has the potential to make justice more efficient and accessible, but only if used responsibly. The courtroom isn\u2019t just a place for clever tech; it\u2019s a place where truth, fairness, and human judgment must come first.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

As the legal system evolves, we must ask: are we using AI to serve justice or just chasing the hype?
<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div><\/div>\n\n\n\n

Lea Christiaanson, Director, No.53 Legal Limited 24th July 2025<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

AI in the Courtroom Fair Trial -v- Tech Hype Artificial intelligence is changing how we live; and now, it\u2019s changing how we go to court. From drafting legal documents to analysing evidence, AI tools are being used more and more in England\u2019s justice system. But is this progress, or a potential threat to fair trials? […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"zakra_page_container_layout":"customizer","zakra_page_sidebar_layout":"customizer","zakra_remove_content_margin":false,"zakra_sidebar":"customizer","zakra_transparent_header":"customizer","zakra_logo":0,"zakra_main_header_style":"default","zakra_menu_item_color":"","zakra_menu_item_hover_color":"","zakra_menu_item_active_color":"","zakra_menu_active_style":"","zakra_page_header":true,"_uag_custom_page_level_css":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[179],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2758","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-general"],"uagb_featured_image_src":{"full":false,"thumbnail":false,"medium":false,"medium_large":false,"large":false,"1536x1536":false,"2048x2048":false,"mailpoet_newsletter_max":false},"uagb_author_info":{"display_name":"Lea_NSW","author_link":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/archives\/author\/admin"},"uagb_comment_info":0,"uagb_excerpt":"AI in the Courtroom Fair Trial -v- Tech Hype Artificial intelligence is changing how we live; and now, it\u2019s changing how we go to court. From drafting legal documents to analysing evidence, AI tools are being used more and more in England\u2019s justice system. But is this progress, or a potential threat to fair trials?…","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2758","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2758"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2758\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2817,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2758\/revisions\/2817"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2758"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2758"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.no53legal.uk\/nws\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2758"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}