Citing AI-Generated Fake Precedents Is Advocate Misconduct; Judgments Based On Them Are Void : Supreme...

AI Citations Held to Be Misconduct

The Supreme Court has said that citing precedents generated by artificial intelligence, where those authorities turn out to be fabricated, amounts to misconduct on the part of an advocate. The observation, reported by Live Law, carries a further consequence: any judgment resting on such non-existent citations is treated as void. The court's position places the responsibility squarely on the person signing the pleading, not on the tool that produced the material.

Why It Matters for Business

For companies, tax departments and compliance teams, the development sharpens the risks attached to AI-assisted legal work. Drafting tools that summarise case law or suggest supporting authorities can produce plausible-looking citations to decisions that do not exist. If such a citation enters a filing and later underpins an order, the order itself may not survive. That exposes litigants to wasted hearings, fresh proceedings and costs, and it can unsettle transactions or assessments that were believed to be settled. The ruling also signals that counsel cannot deflect blame onto software; verification of every authority remains a professional obligation. In-house teams instructing external lawyers, and advisers preparing notes or opinions, may therefore need to build checks that confirm each case cited actually exists and stands for the proposition claimed.

What to Watch Next

Attention now turns to how the reasoning is framed in the full order, including whether the court draws a distinction between inadvertent errors and repeated or reckless reliance on unverified material. Also relevant is whether disciplinary bodies take up the misconduct observation, and how tribunals and High Courts apply the voidness principle to past matters where authenticity of citations is questioned. Regulators and professional bodies may weigh in with practice guidance on AI use in filings. Clients should watch for revised engagement terms, indemnities and interna…