In a wake-up call for the legal profession, UK High Court justice Victoria Sharp and colleague Jeremy Johnson have flagged a worrying trend: lawyers entering AI-generated cases that never existed into court filings. The move, they warn, poses a serious threat to public trust and could land attorneys in contempt or even perverting the course of justice.
The alert was raised during a 90-million-pound lawsuit involving the Qatar National Bank. There, a lawyer cited 18 phantom rulings, all fabricated by AI tools, leaving the court misled. The client, Hamad Al-Haroun, took responsibility, but Sharp rebuked the reversal of roles and questioned reliance on unverified research.
In a separate housing dispute against the London Borough of Haringey, barrister Sarah Forey faced scrutiny for referencing five non-existent cases. Although she denied AI use, the judges found no coherent explanation. Both lawyers have been referred to their professional regulators, though no further sanctions were imposed.
Justice Sharp stressed that AI's use must include rigorous oversight and alignment with established professional and ethical rules. Otherwise, lawyers risk contempt of court or, in extreme cases, charges of perverting the course of justice—punishable by life in prison.
As courts around the world grapple with emerging tech, this episode underscores the need for clear guidelines and rigorous fact-checking. For a new generation of digitally fluent lawyers, mastering AI also means mastering its limits.
Reference(s):
UK judge warns of risk after lawyers cite fake AI-generated cases
cgtn.com
