‘This article explores attempts to regulate the use of “generative” artificial intelligence (GenAI) by the judicial arm of government in jurisdictions in Australasia. There are significant concerns about the use of GenAI-produced materials in courts, including wasting the courts’ resources, fairness concerns and undermining public trust in legal processes. Courts such as those in Singapore, New Zealand and the Australian states of Victoria, Queensland, New South Wales, South Australia and Western Australia have issued guidance or practice notes seeking to direct or limit the use of GenAI tools. Other courts have not issued guidance, but drawn on a range of regulatory strategies to respond to the use of GenAI in proceedings. In this article, we focus on four Australasian jurisdictions: Australia, Hong Kong, New Zealand and Singapore. Responsive regulation invokes the concept of a pyramid of regulatory mechanisms, moving from lower-level options aimed at education and motivating compliance through to punitive measures designed to deter and even to punish. The variety of regulatory strategies courts have adopted includes prohibition, disclosure and awareness-raising. Like the genie, GenAI will not now go back into the bottle as both lawyers and self-represented parties continue to make use of it. We therefore address the future feasibility of current regulatory strategies in this context, and the importance of continuing to refine the regulatory approach.’
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
AI Update 