Self-Representation and AI: A growing risk in Australian Courts

Australian courts are increasingly encountering self-represented litigants who rely on generative AI tools to prepare court documents, research the law, or draft submissions. While AI can seem like an easy shortcut when someone cannot afford a lawyer, the reality is that it often creates more problems than it solves.

Courts are now issuing formal warnings about AI-generated legal material, and recent cases show that using unreliable online tools can derail an otherwise legitimate claim.

Why people are turning to AI

More individuals are appearing in court without legal representation due to financial constraints or limited access to legal assistance. With AI programs widely available and free to use, many litigants see them as a quick way to prepare their own case.

Judges recognise the pressure self-represented litigants face. But they also emphasise that relying on AI without proper legal understanding can seriously damage a case.

The serious problems AI creates in court

Recent decisions reveal that AI-generated material is frequently wrong. Courts have identified examples where AI has produced:

Cases that do not exist
Legal principles that are inaccurate or out of context
Arguments unrelated to the issues in dispute
Submissions that breach court rules or procedural requirements

When that happens, the court must disregard the material entirely. This can lead to:

a valid claim being dismissed
delays in the matter
cost orders against the self-represented party
unnecessary stress and confusion

Unlike a represented litigant, there is no professional to take responsibility for the mistake, the consequences fall solely on the individual.

Privacy and confidentiality concerns

Another major issue is that many people unknowingly upload confidential information into AI chatbots. Courts and law societies are now warning that anything entered into a generative AI system may not remain private. For parties involved in family law, criminal matters, commercial disputes or anything involving confidentiality, the risk is especially high.

Better (and safer) ways to get legal information

Anyone representing themselves should use trusted sources for legal research, such as:

Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII)
Jade legal database
Court websites and practice guides
Public law libraries

These resources contain accurate, up-to-date legislation and case law.

Where does this leave AI?

AI may be useful for general explanations or summarising concepts, but it cannot replace qualified legal advice. Preparing affidavits, drafting pleadings, identifying the correct causes of action, and presenting legal arguments require a level of expertise that current AI tools simply cannot provide.

The growth in AI-generated errors is placing extra pressure on the courts and often sets self-represented litigants back significantly.

Using AI without understanding the law can risk damaging your own case. Your documents might be rejected, you may be at risk of having to pay the other side’s costs and it may unintentionally reveal confidential information.

A conversation with an experienced lawyer can prevent mistakes that may otherwise be difficult, or impossible, to fix later.

If you are involved in a dispute or considering legal action, Baker Love Lawyers can assist with clear guidance and practical representation to help you avoid the pitfalls of AI-driven self-representation.