Generative AI and the courts: the Australian practice notes

New South Wales: Practice Note SC Gen 23

The Chief Justice of New South Wales issued Practice Note SC Gen 23, Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI), on 21 November 2024. After amendment it took effect on 3 February 2025. The District Court applies the same provisions through its own practice note. In outline:

• Gen AI must not be used to generate the content of affidavits, witness statements or character references, which must reflect the deponent’s or witness’s own knowledge. Those documents must contain a statement that Gen AI was not used to generate their content.
• Gen AI must not be used to draft or prepare the content of an expert report without the leave of the court.
• Where Gen AI is used to prepare written submissions or summaries, the author must verify, in the body of the submissions, that all citations, authorities and legislative references exist, are accurate and are relevant, and must verify references to evidence in the same way. That verification must not be carried out solely by a Gen AI tool.
• Information subject to non-publication or suppression orders, the implied (Harman) undertaking, material produced on subpoena, or material subject to a statutory prohibition on publication must not be entered into a Gen AI program unless the practitioner is satisfied it will stay within a controlled, confidential environment, be used only for that proceeding, and not be used to train any model.

Federal Court: GPN-AI

The Federal Court of Australia issued its Generative Artificial Intelligence Practice Note (GPN-AI) in April 2026. It does not prohibit generative AI. It applies to practitioners, self-represented litigants, witnesses and others who produce documents to the Court, and identifies where particular care is needed: pleadings, submissions, evidence, and confidential or protected information. The Court also publishes resources for lawyers and non-lawyers using AI in proceedings.

The note requires disclosure in some circumstances, including where generative AI has been used to summarise, analyse or generate material that informs evidence or an opinion, such as an affidavit, a witness statement or an expert report: the use must then be disclosed at the start of the document. Read GPN-AI itself for its exact terms before relying on this summary.

Victoria: Practice Note SC Gen 25

The Supreme Court of Victoria issued Practice Note SC Gen 25, The Use of Artificial Intelligence by Court Users, on 14 May 2026. It replaced the Court’s 2024 Guidelines for Litigants: Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Litigation, and followed the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s October 2025 report on AI in Victoria’s courts and tribunals. Its core principle is that court users are responsible for the content of their documents, whether or not they used AI. It also provides that AI cannot be used to verify the output of AI, subject to a qualification in paragraph 7.4(e): a user may verify output by referring to the original source material within a generative AI tool.

Queensland

Queensland courts updated their generative AI guidelines for non-lawyers in September 2025. For practitioners, the Supreme Court issued Practice Direction 5 of 2025, Accuracy of References in Submissions, on 24 September 2025. It requires the practitioner responsible for written submissions to be named at the end of them, and treats that as a representation that the references have been verified. The District, Planning and Environment, and Land Courts issued parallel directions. QCAT publishes its own guidance for parties.

Why the courts acted: fabricated citations

Since 2024, courts in several Australian jurisdictions have dealt with submissions citing cases that do not exist or misstating what real cases decided, after practitioners relied on AI output without checking it. Several practitioners have been referred to their regulators.

The common thread is not that AI was used. It is that the output was not verified.

A practical compliance routine

1. Check the practice note or direction for the court you are in. They differ.
2. Never use AI to generate the content of evidence, and record that you have not.
3. Open every authority you cite and confirm it says what you rely on it for, at the paragraph.
4. Keep confidential, suppressed and compelled material out of tools that train on it or retain it.
5. Keep a note of how AI was used, in case the court asks.

Barrister AI answers with pinpoint citations to the paragraph so each one can be opened and checked, never trains models on your work, and keeps its servers and database in Sydney. See Security for exactly where data goes, including AI model calls, and Privilege.

Frequently asked questions

Sources

• Supreme Court of NSW, Practice Note SC Gen 23: Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Gen AI)
• District Court of NSW, Generative AI Practice Note (adopting SC Gen 23)
• Federal Court of Australia, Generative Artificial Intelligence Practice Note (GPN-AI)
• Federal Court of Australia, Notice to the profession, 16 April 2026
• Supreme Court of Victoria, SC Gen 25: The use of Artificial Intelligence by Court users
• QCAT, Using artificial intelligence in QCAT matters