Courts in Multiple Jurisdictions Issue New Rules and Warnings on AI Use After Surge in Fabricated Citations

Aug 3, 2026

Courts are implementing strict regulations and issuing sanctions in response to a surge of fabricated citations and low-quality filings driven by generative artificial intelligence. Ireland's High Court has introduced Practice Direction HC 142, requiring human verification and explicit declarations for witness and expert evidence. Meanwhile, the Connecticut Supreme Court has sanctioned attorney Ian Gottlieb for submitting ChatGPT-generated hallucinations, underscoring lawyers' ethical duties.

Court AI rules and caseload impacts

▪Practice Direction HC 142 applies to pleadings, submissions, affidavits, witness statements, and expert reports prepared after September 1, 2026, in Irish civil proceedings.
▪Workplace claims filed by self-represented litigants in the Federal Court more than doubled over the past year, driven by applicants using artificial intelligence.
▪Ireland's High Court issued Practice Direction HC 142, effective September 1, 2026, establishing rules for generative artificial intelligence use in civil proceedings.

AI hallucination risks

▪Generative artificial intelligence tools can produce fictitious cases, legislation, academic references, factual errors, bias, and misleading summaries of genuine sources.
▪Entering information into generative artificial intelligence systems can breach confidentiality or lead to the loss of legal privilege.
▪The Connecticut Supreme Court sanctioned attorney Ian Gottlieb for submitting court documents containing erroneous and unverified citations generated by OpenAI's ChatGPT.

Human verification requirements

▪Ireland's High Court requires all artificial intelligence-assisted material to be independently checked under human supervision, and using artificial intelligence to confirm accuracy is insufficient.
▪The Connecticut Supreme Court ruled that lawyers are personally responsible for ensuring the accuracy of all court filings produced with generative artificial intelligence.

Witness evidence declarations

▪Ireland's High Court permits administrative uses of artificial intelligence, such as formatting and spell-checking, in affidavits and witness statements without requiring a declaration.
▪Under Ireland's High Court rules, affidavits and witness statements must include a declaration confirming generative artificial intelligence was not used to produce or rephrase substantive evidence.

Expert report disclosure

▪Expert reports submitted to Ireland's High Court must state that their substantive content reflects the expert's own opinions and reasoning.
▪Experts in Irish High Court civil proceedings must disclose any material use of artificial intelligence for drafting, analysing, interpreting, or generating content.

Non-compliance sanctions

▪The Connecticut Supreme Court ordered attorney Ian Gottlieb to complete six additional hours of continuing legal education on ethics and law office management as a sanction.
▪Non-compliance with Ireland's High Court artificial intelligence rules can result in adverse cost orders, document rejection, striking out claims, or professional regulatory referrals.