Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » Artificial Intelligence
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL

July 1, 2026 · by gexall · in Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

The Civil Justice Council is carrying out a Consultation on the Use of AI for the preparation of court documents.  It published an update on its consultation findings yesterday.   The preliminary view appears to be that the use of AI…

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

THE BAR STANDARDS BOARD GUIDANCE ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND OTHER TECHNOLOGIES: THE KEY POINTS AND SEVEN USEFUL CHECKLISTS

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have seen examples of barristers getting into difficulties because of the misuse of AI.  The Bar Standards Handbook  gives 14 pages of useful guidance to the Bar. I have attempted to summarise the guidance here and provide some useful…

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES...)

THE NEW SRA GUIDANCE ON EFFECTIVE SUPERVISION 2: GUIDANCE AND CHECKLISTS ON THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE (WITH A LITTLE HELP FROM OTHER SOURCES…)

June 16, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Case Management, Civil Procedure, Members Content

It is clear from recent developments that the use of AI can be useful in litigation, however it can also lead to major problems.  The new SRA Guidance recognises the issues in relation to the need to supervise AI use,…

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS  (THERE IS NO "DEEMED ADMISSION") PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE "HALLUCINATED" "FICTITIOUS" RULE

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN A PARTY DOES NOT RESPOND TO A NOTICE TO ADMIT FACTS (THERE IS NO “DEEMED ADMISSION”) PLUS ANOTHER POSSIBLE “HALLUCINATED” “FICTITIOUS” RULE

June 2, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

This case has two important practical points. Firstly (contrary to the case put forward by the claimant) a failure to respond to a Notice to Admit facts does not give rise to an “implied admission” by the recipient of the…

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU "OWN" IT...

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE CITATION OF MISLEADING AUTHORITIES: ANOTHER WEEK, ANOTHER CASE: IF YOUR NAME IS ON THE DOCUMENT YOU “OWN” IT…

May 15, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We are looking at another case where the judge has expressed major concerns about the use of Artificial Intelligence in the preparation of documents for the court.  The situation is now a (depressingly) familiar one where the use of AI…

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS'S OWN WORDS?

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE PREPARATION OF WITNESS STATEMENTS: THERE IS NO SATISFACTORY EXPLANATION FOR THIS: HOW DOES THE JUDGE KNOW IT IS THE WITNESS’S OWN WORDS?

April 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Witness statements

We have another case where the judge considers the use of Artificial Intelligence in the preparation of witness statements.  It was held that there was no good reason for this.  He was concerned that ChatGPT had contributed to the witness…

MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND "HALLUCINATED" CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY

MORE DECISIONS ABOUT ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND “HALLUCINATED” CASES: THE UPPER TRIBUNAL IS FAR FROM HAPPY: LEGAL PROFESSIONALS WHO DELEGATE THEIR WORK REMAIN RESPONSIBLE FOR ENSURING ITS ACCURACY

February 20, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

As I’ve said before the hallucinated cases just keep on coming. The issues were considered by the Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) here.  There are important points about the need to supervise staff who undertake legal research. It is…

THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION

THE USE OF AI FOR PREPARING COURT DOCUMENTS: READ THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL INTERIM REPORT AND CONSULTATION

February 19, 2026 · by gexall · in Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

The Civil Justice Council has produced an interim report and consultation document on the use of AI for preparing Court documents.  This is worthwhile reading. It summarises many of the current issues “Artificial intelligence (“AI”) has enormous potential to be…

A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS

A FURTHER EXAMPLE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE GENERATING PHANTOM REFERENCES AND FALSE QUOTATIONS

January 30, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

We see the another example of the dangers of the use of Artificial Intelligence in this case.  Two authorities relied upon by a respondent did not contain the words attributed to them, none of them supported the propositions that had…

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD "NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY" THAT AI WAS USED

PROVIDING LEGAL SUBMISSIONS WITH INACCURATE CASE SUMMARIES: THE REPRESENTATIVE WHO WOULD “NEITHER CONFIRM OR DENY” THAT AI WAS USED

January 14, 2026 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Relief from sanctions

We are returning to the vexed issue of the (mis) use of Artificial Intelligence when providing written submissions to the court (in the case the First Tier Tribunal).  The judge found that summaries provided were inaccurate.    The judgment points…

REVIEW OF THE YEAR (2) - THE WORST PART: "HALLUCINATED" CASES IN THE COURTS: HOW IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BEING HANDLED & WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD FOR AI AND LAWYERS?

REVIEW OF THE YEAR (2) – THE WORST PART: “HALLUCINATED” CASES IN THE COURTS: HOW IS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE BEING HANDLED & WHAT DOES THE FUTURE HOLD FOR AI AND LAWYERS?

December 12, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content

If I had to pick the most frightening development of the year it is the revelation that parts of the legal profession have been relying on “hallucinated” (that is false) cases they have “found” by using Artificial Intelligence.   Here we…

AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION:  READ ALL ABOUT IT...

AI USED IN THE WRITING OF A JUDICIAL DECISION: READ ALL ABOUT IT…

September 23, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Artificial Intelligence, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

There has been much discussion of the advantages, and disadvantages, in lawyers using AI. This is clearly going to be a major issue for the legal profession going forwarded.   Last week I reviewed Andrew Hogan’s book on this topic. There…

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE COURTS: SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JUDICIAL GUIDANCE

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE COURTS: SELECTED HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE JUDICIAL GUIDANCE

April 10, 2024 · by gexall · in Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content

We have looked before at problems caused by Artificial Intelligence being used in court.   It is worthwhile looking at the Courts and Tribunals Judiciary publication “Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidance for Judicial Office Holders. It shows some of the dangers in…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.4K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: WHEN A LITIGATOR MAKES A STATEMENT ON BEHALF OF THEIR CLIENT: A USEFUL CHECKLIST ON THE SOURCE OF INFORMATION AND BELIEF
  • EXPERT WATCH 56: A SECTION OF A JUDGMENT THAT SPECIFICALLY CRITICISES A MEDICAL EXPERT: “I WAS STRUCK BY THE ABSENCE OF A RIGOROUS AND CAREFUL MULTIDISCPLINARY APPROACH TO THIS ISSUES IN THIS CASE”
  • EXPERT WATCH 55: WAS THIS WAR? (OR CAUSED BY WAR): TRIAL JUDGE CONSIDERS THE EVIDENCE OF TWO EXPERTS ON GEOPOLITICS, BUT FINDS ONE IS PARTISAN
  • PERSONAL INJURY MATTERS 17 (1): LIABILITY CATCHUP (1): PUB OPERATOR IS NOT VICARIOUSLY LIABLE FOR DOORMEN’S ACTS: A CONCLUSION REACHED “WITH REGRET”
  • COST BITES 411: HOW DOES A COURT DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF AN INTERIM PAYMENT AS TO COSTS WHEN THE CASE HAS NOT BEEN BUDGETED? SHOULD A PAYMENT BE ORDERED AT ALL?

Top Posts

RELIEF FROM SANCTIONS: AS STRONGLY WORDED A REFUSAL AS I HAVE SEEN: THE CONCEPT "DOES NOT EMBODY A PRINCIPLE OF "BREACH NOW REPENT LATER"
A SOLICITOR SHOULD JUST NOT BE SAYING THIS IS IN A WITNESS STATEMENT: IT "STRAYED WELL BEYOND WHAT SHE COULD LEGALLY GIVE EVIDENCE ABOUT FROM HER OWN KNOWLEDGE INCLUDED HEARSAY FROM AN UNNAMED SOURCE AND INCLUDED STATEMENTS OF OPINION WHICH SHE DID NOT HAVE THE EXPERTISE TO GIVE..."
THE ONLINE PROCEDURE (RULES AND PRACTICE DIRECTIONS) RULES 2026 COME INTO FORCE ON THE 7th SEPTEMBER: HERE IS A SUMMARY (AND THE RULES THEMSLVES)
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND LITIGATION: AN UPDATE ON CONSULTATION FINDINGS FROM THE CIVIL JUSTICE COUNCIL
WHERE THINGS WENT WRONG IN LITIGATION (AND STOPPING IT HAPPENING TO YOU) 2: ADVISING A CLIENT THAT THEY ARE NOT LIABLE FOR COSTS BECAUSE PROCEEDINGS HAVE NOT BEEN SERVED

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.