AI Hallucinations In Court: Lessons From The UK, US And Australia

As artificial intelligence tools become more embedded in legal practice, courts around the world are beginning to confront the consequences of their misuse.

Recent cases from the United Kingdom, United States and Australia are timely reminders of the professional obligations lawyers must uphold when using AI in legal practice, or when relying on client-provided material that may have been generated by AI.

United Kingdom: Duty to the court prevails

In the UK case of Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey and Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank (Ayinde),¹ the Divisional Court examined the conduct of legal practitioners who submitted documents containing AI-generated content. In Ayinde, a solicitor relied on case citations provided by their client, which were later found to be fabricated or inaccurate material sourced from generative AI tools. This type of error is commonly referred to as an AI 'hallucination' where an AI tool generates content that appears plausible