The Court held that a VCAT member's use of an AI-generated transcript as the basis for preparing written reasons does not constitute an error of law, characterising the AI tool as a transcription aid analogous to a judge's own notes or a staff-typed transcript, distinguishable from using AI to generate the reasoning itself. The Court further held that oral reasons given at the hearing remain part of the Tribunal's reasons under s 117(6) of the VCAT Act and may be read together with written reasons, such that the omission of an express fairness finding from the written reasons was not an error where that finding was clearly made orally. On the s 109 costs discretion, the Court confirmed that the Tribunal is not required to make express findings on every subsection of s 109(3) where the parties did not raise matters referable to all subsections, and that the appellate threshold for disturbing a costs discretion remains high.
The full text is available to signed-in members.