Tech
More people are using AI in court, not a lawyer. It could cost you money—and your case
When you don’t have the money for a lawyer to represent you in a court case, even judges can understand the temptation to get free help from anywhere—including tapping into generative artificial intelligence (AI).
As Judge My Anh Tran in the County Court of Victoria said this year: “Generative AI can be beguiling, particularly when the task of representing yourself seems overwhelming. However, a litigant runs the risk that their case will be damaged, rather than helped, if they choose to use AI without taking the time to understand what it produces, and to confirm that it is both legally and factually accurate.”
Our research has so far found 84 reported cases of generative AI use in Australian courts since ChatGPT launched in late 2022. While cases involving lawyers have had the most media attention, we found more than three-quarters of those cases (66 of 84) involved people representing themselves, known as “self-represented litigants.”
Those people—who sometimes have valid legal claims—are increasingly turning to different generative AI tools to help on everything from property and will disputes, to employment, bankruptcy, defamation, and migration cases.
Our ongoing research is part of an upcoming report for the Australian Academy of Law, being launched later in the year. But we’re sharing our findings now because this is a growing real-world problem.
Just this month, Queensland’s courts issued updated guidance for self-represented litigants, warning using “inaccurate AI-generated information in court” could cause delays, or worse: “a costs order may be made against you.”
As New South Wales Chief Justice Andrew Bell observed in a decision in August this year, the self-represented respondent was “admirably candid with the court in relation to her use of AI.” But while she was “doing her best to defend her interests,” her AI-generated submissions were often “misconceived, unhelpful and irrelevant.”
If you’re considering using AI in your own case, here’s what you need to know.
The temptation to rely on AI
Self-representation in Australian courts is more common than many people realize.
For example, 79% of litigants in migration matters at the Federal Circuit Court were unrepresented in 2023-2024.
The Queensland District Court has said “a significant number of civil proceedings involve self-represented parties.” The County Court of Victoria last year created easy-to-use forms for self-represented litigants.
But as the availability of free or low-cost generative AI tools increases, so does the temptation to use AI, as our recent research paper highlighted.
The risks if AI gets it wrong
Relying on AI tools that produce fake law can result in court documents being rejected, and valid claims being lost in court.
If you’re a self-represented litigant, the court system gives you the right to provide evidence and argument to support your case. But if that evidence or argument is not real, the court must reject it. That means you could lose your day in court.
In those circumstances, the court may make a costs order against a self-represented litigant—meaning you could end up having to pay your opponent’s legal costs.
Lawyers here and overseas have also been caught relying on inaccurate AI-generated law in court.
But a key difference is that if a lawyer uses fake cases that the court rejects, this is likely to amount to negligence. Their client might be able to sue the lawyer.
When someone representing themselves makes the error, they only have themselves to blame.
How can you reduce your risks?
The safest advice is to avoid AI for legal research.
There are many free, publicly available legal research websites for Australian law. The best known is the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AUSTLII). Another is Jade.
Court libraries and law schools are open to the public and have online resources about how to conduct legal research. Libraries will often have textbooks that set out principles of law.
Australian courts, such as the Supreme Court of Queensland, Supreme Court of NSW and Supreme Court of Victoria, have all issued guidance on when generative AI can and cannot be used.
Check if there’s a guide from the relevant court for your case. Follow their advice.
If you still plan to use generative AI, you must check everything against a reliable source. You need to search for each case you plan to cite, not just to make sure it exists, but also that it says what an AI summary says it does.
And as Queensland’s guide for self-litigants warns: “Do not enter any private, confidential, suppressed or legally privileged information into a Generative AI chatbot […] Anything you put into a Generative AI chatbot could become publicly known. This could result in you unintentionally breaching suppression orders, or accidentally disclosing your own or someone else’s private or confidential information.”
Conducting legal research and producing court documents is not easy. That’s what trained lawyers are for, which is why affordable, accessible legal services are necessary for a fair justice system.
AI is being used to address an access to justice problem that it is not well-suited to—at least, not yet.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Citation:
More people are using AI in court, not a lawyer. It could cost you money—and your case (2025, September 29)
retrieved 29 September 2025
from https://techxplore.com/news/2025-09-people-ai-court-lawyer-money.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no
part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
Tech
Can OpenAI’s ‘Master of Disaster’ Fix AI’s Reputation Crisis?
Three months ago, OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman told me his concerns about a mounting public relations crisis facing artificial intelligence companies: Despite the popularity of tools like ChatGPT, an increasingly large share of the population said they viewed AI negatively. Since then, the backlash has only intensified.
College commencement speakers are now getting booed for talking about AI in optimistic terms. Last month, someone threw a Molotov cocktail at OpenAI CEO Sam Altman’s San Francisco home and wrote a manifesto advocating for crimes against AI executives. No one has more to lose from this reputation crisis than OpenAI.
The person tasked with trying to fix it is Chris Lehane, OpenAI’s chief of global affairs and a veteran political operative. I sat down with him this week to discuss what I’d argue are his two biggest challenges yet: convincing the world to embrace OpenAI’s technology, while at the same time persuading lawmakers to adopt regulations that won’t hamper the company’s growth. Lehane views these goals as one in the same.
“When I was in the White House, we always used to talk about how good policy equals good politics,” says Lehane. “You have to think about both of these things moving in concert.”
After working on crisis communications in Bill Clinton’s White House, Lehane gave himself the nickname “master of disaster.” He later helped Airbnb fend off regulators in cities that viewed short-term home rentals as existing in a legal gray area, or as he puts it, “ahead of the law.” Lehane also played an instrumental role in the formation of Fairshake, a powerful crypto industry super PAC that worked to legitimize digital currencies in Washington. Since joining OpenAI in 2024, he’s quickly become one of the company’s most influential executives and now oversees its communications and policy teams.
Lehane tells me public narratives about how AI will change society are often “artificially binary.” On one side is the “Bob Ross view of the world” that predicts a future where nobody has to work anymore and everyone lives in “beachside homes painting in watercolors all day.” On the other is a dystopian future in which AI has become so powerful that only a small group of elites have the ability to control it. Neither scenario, in Lehane’s opinion, is very realistic.
OpenAI is guilty of promoting this kind of polarizing speech in the past. CEO Sam Altman warned last year that “whole classes of jobs” will go away when the singularity arrives. More recently he has softened his tone, declaring that “jobs doomerism is likely long-term wrong.”
Lehane wants OpenAI to start conveying a more “calibrated” message about the promises of AI that avoids either of these extremes. He says the company needs to put forward real solutions to the problems people are worried about, such as potential widespread job loss and the negative impacts of chatbots on children. As an example of this work, Lehane pointed to a list of policy proposals that OpenAI recently published, which include creating a four-day work week, expanding access to health care, and passing a tax on AI-powered labor.
“If you’re going to go out and say that there are challenges here, you also then have an obligation—particularly if you’re building this stuff—to actually come up with the ideas to solve those things,” Lehane says.
Some former OpenAI employees, however, have accused the company of downplaying the potential downsides of AI adoption. WIRED previously reported that members of OpenAI’s economic research unit quit after they became concerned that it was morphing into an advocacy arm for the company. The former employees argued that their warnings about AI’s economic impacts may have been inconvenient for OpenAI, but they honestly reflected what the company’s research found.
Packing Punches
With public skepticism toward AI growing, politicians are under pressure to prove to voters they can rein in tech companies. To combat this, the AI industry has stood up a new group of super PACs that are boosting pro-AI political candidates and trying to influence public opinion about the technology. Critics say the move backfired, and some candidates have started campaigning on the fact that AI super PACS are opposing them.
Lehane helped set up one of the biggest pro-AI super PACs, Leading the Future, which launched last summer with more than $100 million in funding commitments from tech industry figures, including Brockman. The group has opposed Alex Bores, the author of New York’s strongest AI safety law who is running for Congress in the state’s 12th district.
Tech
Meta Is in Crisis, Google Search’s Makeover, and AI Gets Booed by Graduates
Leah Feiger: Let’s invest.
Zoë Schiffer: They have that going for a while.
Leah Feiger: It wasn’t full Google, but it—
Zoë Schiffer: Somewhat there.
Leah Feiger: —had that vibe. To me, someone so on the outside of this in every single way, I know about these layoffs because they’ve been, A) so chaotic, but B) in some ways, needlessly so. Not to say that other tech companies aren’t firing scores of workers all the time. That feels like something we discuss on this podcast frequently, but this is happening with such a large runway and in a way that’s making employees feel so terrible about themselves.
Brian Barrett: Well, because it’s not just the layoffs, right? It’s also, even if you stay there, if you’re not culled from the herd, you are going to have to deal with this world in which you’ve got spyware on your laptops training AI to probably take your job at some point, right?
Zoë Schiffer: Explain that a little bit.
Brian Barrett: Meta announced, and this was more public, that they were going to put software on employee laptops that would monitor their keystrokes and how they move their cursors and basically how they do their job as Meta engineers and use that as training data for their own internal models to try to make their AI models better because they’re running out of other sources.
Zoë Schiffer: And could you opt out of that, Brian?
Brian Barrett: That’s a great question. I’m so glad you asked. You could not opt out.
Zoë Schiffer: I felt you didn’t know the answer to that one.
Brian Barrett: In fact, when an employee asked in a very public forum within Meta, “Hey, could we not do this?” Zoë, the response was?
Zoë Schiffer: Oh, absolutely you’re going to do this and shame on you for asking. And some of the employees who are staying, actually thousands of the employees who are staying, are getting drafted into the AI ranks. We published a piece today that was kind of about the morale inside the company, but also how there’s been this mad dash to use up perks and stipends that employees have. But one of the things that’s said at the end was that remaining employees are being asked to join AI teams. So whatever your job was previously, they’re internally getting drafted. You’re getting drafted into the AI ranks, now your job is going to look quite different.
Brian Barrett: That’s like 7,000 people.
Zoë Schiffer: Yes.
Leah Feiger: I’ve actually heard people use the word raptured.
Zoë Schiffer: Oh, my gosh.
Leah Feiger: Isn’t that—
Zoë Schiffer: And I wish we had that in the story.
Leah Feiger: I’m so sorry, but raptured into other teams. All of a sudden one day they’ve just disappeared. After this layoff, has Zuckerberg and co proposed a sort of coherent leadership plan or proposal? What happens after this?
Tech
Why the 2026 Hurricane Season Might Not Be That Bad
Atlantic hurricane season is almost upon us, and the early signs indicate it might be less active than usual. But that’s no reason to delete your weather app and ignore the forecast.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration is predicting eight to 14 named tropical systems, of which three to six will become hurricanes and one to three will be Category 3 or higher.
“What’s driving this forecast is largely an El Niño event,” said NOAA administrator Neil Jacobs.
Characterized by a tongue of hot water stretching across the Pacific, El Niño is likely to emerge this summer. That stretch of warm ocean rearranges weather patterns around the world. In the case of the tropical Atlantic, El Niño stirs up winds that make it hard for hurricanes to spin up. Those that do can sometimes be torn apart by what’s going on in the upper atmosphere. (The opposite is true in the Pacific, and NOAA is predicting a very active season in that ocean basin.)
During the three past super El Niños, accumulated cyclone energy—a metric that factors in storms’ strength and longevity—was well below normal.
That said, El Niño, even an extremely strong one, is only one of many factors that impact hurricane season. Hot local ocean temperatures can help storms form and gain strength, and the Atlantic is currently warmer than normal.
At the same time, Sahara dust can gum up the atmosphere and inhibit storms from forming. It’s also notoriously hard to predict when plumes of it will kick up. That’s what happened last year, when a below-average number of named storms formed despite an active forecast. Despite the lower-than-expected activity, last year still spawned Hurricane Melissa, one of the strongest storms to ever make landfall in the Atlantic basin.
All of which is to say that the seasonal forecast is a handy guide for what to expect, and it’s great for federal and state agencies to preposition supplies and resources. But it’s what happens with individual storms that ultimately matters.
“Even though we’re expecting a below average season in the Atlantic, it’s important to understand it only takes one,” Jacobs said, noting that even in quiet years, Category 5 storms have still made landfall.
The Trump administration has slashed staffing at NOAA and reduced the collection of some data, such as weather balloons, that can impact forecasts. Jacobs touted the value of new observations, including aerial drones that will be deployed operationally for the first time.
NOAA has also ramped up the use of artificial intelligence weather models trained on historical data. During the 2025 hurricane season, the agency tested an experimental hurricane model developed with Google DeepMind. Late last year, it also rolled out a suite of AI weather models to use in operational forecasting, in addition to traditional weather models that use equations to forecast the weather.
The agency says that the AI version of its flagship model provides better prediction of the tracks of tropical cyclones—the generic name for hurricanes—though it lags traditional weather models in predicting their intensity.
-
Entertainment1 week agoConan O’Brien hat tricks as Oscar host
-
Fashion1 week agoItaly’s Zegna Group’s Q1 growth boosted by strong organic performance
-
Entertainment6 days agoWhere Pete Davidson, Elsie Hewitt stand after breakup: Details revealed
-
Business1 week agoTui issues update on summer jet fuel shortage fears
-
Business1 week agoJersey Election 2026: Cost of living concern in St Helier Central
-
Entertainment7 days agoEmilia Clarke recalls near-death incident while filming ‘Game of Thrones’
-
Fashion1 week agoGlobal cotton production, stocks to fall; consumption to rise: WASDE
-
Politics6 days agoRising diesel costs from Iran war strain US school budgets
