Masood Ahmed & Lal Akhter discuss lawyers’ responsibilities in the age of AI hallucinations
- In the Ayinde case, the Divisional Court warned that lawyers are fully accountable for verifying all legal references, stressing that accountability lies with the legal professional, not the AI tool.
- The Civil Justice Council has established an AI working group to examine the use of AI in court documents and to consider potential amendments to procedural rules.
In the now well-publicised judgment of R (on the application of Frederick Ayinde) v Haringey London Borough Council; Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank QPSC and another company [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin), the Divisional Court (Dame Victoria Sharp P and Mr Justice Johnson) gave a clear warning to lawyers about the use of AI and called for urgent steps to be taken to address its misuse. The cases arose from the submission of pleadings and witness statements by lawyers containing references to non-existent case law. Both cases were heard together under the court’s Hamid jurisdiction, its inherent power to regulate proceedings and uphold
