Court incidents, official rule revisions and analysis in Australia, as they enter the record. Researched and drafted with AI assistance; verified against primary sources and edited by Cognesio LLP. The linked official documents are the record — our summaries are not the law and are not legal advice.https://safelegalai.comen-gbCC BY 4.0 — SafeLegalAI, published by Cognesio LLPhttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/may-judges-use-ai-explainerhttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/may-judges-use-ai-explainerThe regulation map records 39 country answers on judicial AI use: binding rules, guidance, proposals and one case-law answer.Fri, 04 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMTarticleukirelandus-federalcanadaaustraliaindiainternationalotherhttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/must-lawyers-verify-ai-output-explainerhttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/must-lawyers-verify-ai-output-explainerAcross 130 country records, 50 have a binding, guidance, proposed or case-law answer on verification of AI output.Fri, 04 Sep 2026 00:00:00 GMTarticleukirelandus-federalus-statecanadaaustraliaindiasingaporeinternationalotherhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/mfrd-v-national-disability-insurance-agencyhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/mfrd-v-national-disability-insurance-agencyIn Australia's Administrative Review Tribunal, a self-represented NDIS applicant filed submissions prepared with generative AI that contained fictitious tribunal decisions and inaccurate statutory references. General Member Strange warned that false AI-generated material can hamper tribunal decision-making, then decided the merits and remitted the support decision for reconsideration. Primary source: MFRD and National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIS), [2026] ARTA 1833 (26 Aug 2026), decision PDF via Charlotin database — https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2987/MFRD_and_National_Disability_Insurance_Agency_NDIS_2026_ARTA_1833_26_August_2026.pdfWed, 26 Aug 2026 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/asif-v-minister-immigrationhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/asif-v-minister-immigrationDismissing a student-visa judicial review, the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia fixed costs of AUD 9,097.93 against a self-represented applicant, increased because of AI misuse, after his ChatGPT-written submissions cited nonexistent paragraphs and cases. The judgment reproduces the judge's exchange with ChatGPT, in which the tool admitted having spun a fictional story about one of his judgments. Primary source: Asif v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2026] FedCFamC2G 1402 (22 Jul 2026), judgment (Charlotin database archive PDF of the AustLII text) — https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2711/Asif_v_Minister_for_Immigration_and_Citizenship_2026_FedCFamC2G_1402_22_July_2026.pdfWed, 22 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/shahin-v-industrial-relations-secretaryhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/shahin-v-industrial-relations-secretaryA Full Bench of the Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales refused leave to appeal an unfair-dismissal decision, criticising the self-represented appellant's use of generative AI under Practice Note 33 after his submissions applied the wrong statute and his evidence about post-dismissal income was inconsistent. The bench drew adverse inferences but made no costs order. Primary source: Shahin v Industrial Relations Secretary (No 2) [2026] NSWIRComm 11 (21 Jul 2026), Full Bench decision (Charlotin database archive PDF) — https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/2989/Shahin_v_Industrial_Relations_Secretary_No.2_2026_NSWIRComm_11_21_July_2026.pdfTue, 21 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/resources/guidance/australia-law-society-ai-guidance-historyhttps://safelegalai.com/resources/guidance/australia-law-society-ai-guidance-historyAustralian regulator guidance on generative AI — Queensland's Guidance Statement 37, the three-regulator joint statement, and the NSW solicitor's guide.Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMTarticleaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/dayal-fedcfamc2f-1166https://safelegalai.com/analysis/dayal-fedcfamc2f-1166A solicitor filed four AI-invented authorities; the court's referral led the regulator to bar him as a principal and impose two years' supervision.Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMTarticleaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/nsw-sc-gen-23-strictest-ai-court-rulehttps://safelegalai.com/analysis/nsw-sc-gen-23-strictest-ai-court-ruleNew South Wales runs the strictest AI court rule in the common-law world: affidavits must declare AI was NOT used. Here is what the practice note requires.Wed, 15 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMTarticleaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-sc-gen-25-ai-court-usershttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-sc-gen-25-ai-court-usersPractice Note SC GEN 25 of the Supreme Court of Victoria, issued 14 May 2026, replaces the court's May 2024 guidelines for litigants. Court users must keep meaningful human control over AI-assisted work, may not verify one AI tool's output with another, must ensure sworn documents are in the deponent's own words, and may be directed to identify AI-produced portions. Primary source: Supreme Court of Victoria — Original — https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/areas/legal-resources/practice-notes/sc-gen-25-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-by-court-usersThu, 14 May 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-supreme-court-judicial-ai-guidelineshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-supreme-court-judicial-ai-guidelinesGuidelines issued by the Supreme Court of Victoria on 14 May 2026, alongside Practice Note SC GEN 25, governing judicial officers' and chambers staff use of AI. Judges may not use generative AI for decision-making or the substantive content of judgments, must protect confidential case material, and must verify any AI-assisted administrative output. Primary source: Supreme Court of Victoria — Original — https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/news/new-practice-note-and-judicial-guidelines-on-the-use-of-artificial-intelligenceThu, 14 May 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-federal-court-gpn-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-federal-court-gpn-aiPractice note GPN-AI, issued by the Federal Court of Australia on 16 April 2026, sets the court's expectations of all participants who use generative AI in proceedings. Practitioners and parties remain responsible for verifying AI-assisted content, must be able to explain how AI was used if asked, and the court may make orders regulating AI use in a particular proceeding. Primary source: Federal Court of Australia — Original — https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-aiThu, 16 Apr 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-local-court-generative-ai-practice-notehttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-local-court-generative-ai-practice-noteA practice note of the Local Court of New South Wales, commencing 12 January 2026, extending the Supreme Court's SC Gen 23 regime to the state's busiest court. Generative AI may not be used to produce the content of affidavits, witness statements or character references, such documents must disclose that AI was not used, and practitioners must verify AI-assisted submissions. Primary source: NSW Local Court — Original (commenced 12 January 2026) — https://localcourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/practice-notes/other/Practice_Note_Generative_Artificial_Intelligence_Commences_12.01.26.pdfMon, 12 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/law-society-nsw-solicitors-guide-responsible-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/law-society-nsw-solicitors-guide-responsible-aiA guide published by the Law Society of New South Wales in January 2026 for solicitors on responsible AI use. It explains how the Solicitors Conduct Rules and court practice notes, including SC Gen 23, apply to AI-assisted work, and sets expectations on verification, confidentiality, client communication, supervision and selecting tools with appropriate data protections. Primary source: Law Society of NSW — January 2026 — https://www.lawsociety.com.au/sites/default/files/2026-01/20260109%20LS4816_PSU_GuidetoAI_2026-01-08a%20FINALv2.pdfFri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-nsw-pic-procedural-direction-13-generative-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-nsw-pic-procedural-direction-13-generative-aiThe Personal Injury Commission's direction, in force from 1 January 2026, applies the New South Wales model to workers compensation and motor accidents disputes and goes further in two respects: expert witnesses must disclose AI use, program and version and keep prompt records, and parties may not use AI technology during a hearing. Primary source: NSW Personal Injury Commission — Commenced 1 January 2026 — https://www.pi.nsw.gov.au/resources/procedural-directions/procedural-direction-pic13-use-of-generative-artificial-intelligenceThu, 01 Jan 2026 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/sa-courts-generative-ai-litigation-guidelineshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/sa-courts-generative-ai-litigation-guidelinesGuidelines published by the Courts Administration Authority of South Australia on 24 December 2025 and effective 1 January 2026, applying to all South Australian courts operating under the Uniform Civil, Special Statutory and Joint Criminal Rules. Parties must verify AI-assisted material, protect confidential information, and the rules are to be amended to give the guidelines effect. Primary source: SA Courts — Published 24 December 2025, effective 1 January 2026 — https://www.courts.sa.gov.au/2025/12/24/guidelines-concerning-the-use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence-in-litigation-in-south-australian-courts/Wed, 24 Dec 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-wa-supreme-court-generative-ai-guidelineshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-wa-supreme-court-generative-ai-guidelinesFirst issue, following the court's early-2025 consultation note. The document carries no date on its face; 2025-11-20 is taken from the PDF's creation metadata and should be re-confirmed against the court before it is treated as authoritative. Principles-based guidelines of the Supreme Court of Western Australia for lawyers, self-represented litigants and expert witnesses. AI-generated content relied on in proceedings must be verified by a human who takes legal responsibility; confidential, suppressed or privileged material must not be entered into public tools; and AI use must be disclosed when the court directs. Primary source: Supreme Court of WA — Published November 2025 — https://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/_files/Guidelines%20for%20the%20Use%20of%20Generative%20Artificial%20Intelligence.pdfThu, 20 Nov 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-qld-sc-pd-5-2025-accuracy-of-referenceshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-qld-sc-pd-5-2025-accuracy-of-referencesIssued by Chief Justice Bowskill on 24 September 2025, this practice direction responds to generative AI by requiring every written submission to name the individual person responsible for its contents. Naming oneself certifies that all references have been verified and that the document reflects the practitioner's own professional judgment. Primary source: Supreme Court of Queensland — Original — https://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/882064/sc-pd-5-pf-2025.pdfWed, 24 Sep 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/jne24-v-minister-immigrationhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/jne24-v-minister-immigrationIn Australia's Federal Circuit and Family Court, a Western Australian lawyer filed migration submissions citing four fake authorities produced using Claude and 'validated' with Microsoft Copilot, admitting overconfidence in AI. Judge Gerrard ordered him to pay AUD 8,371.30 in personal costs and referred his conduct to the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia. Primary source: JNE24 v Minister for Immigration and Citizenship [2025] FedCFamC2G 1314 (AustLII) — https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC2G/2025/1314.htmlFri, 15 Aug 2025 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliavendor:microsoft-copilothttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-ncat-procedural-direction-7-generative-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-ncat-procedural-direction-7-generative-aiBased on Practice Note SC Gen 23, modified for the tribunal's jurisdictions. NCAT's procedural direction extends the New South Wales Supreme Court's generative-AI regime to Australia's busiest tribunal. It bars Gen AI from the content of statements, affidavits, statutory declarations and character references, requires verification that must not itself be done with an AI tool, and restricts what may be entered into any program. Primary source: NCAT — Issued 7 March 2025, commenced 7 April 2025 — https://ncat.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/dcj/ctsd/ncat/documents/procedural-directions/ncat-pd7-use-of-generative-ai.pdfFri, 07 Mar 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-wa-supreme-court-ai-practice-direction-consultationhttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-wa-supreme-court-ai-practice-direction-consultationConsultation on whether to make an AI practice direction; superseded by the court's Guidelines for the use of generative AI. A consultation note by which the Supreme Court of Western Australia sought input on whether to make a practice direction on generative AI. It surveys the approaches taken in New Zealand, New South Wales, Queensland, Victoria and the United Kingdom, and characterises the New South Wales regime as prohibitive. Primary source: Supreme Court of WA — Consultation note — https://www.supremecourt.wa.gov.au/_files/AI_practice_direction.pdfMon, 03 Mar 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/valu-v-minister-immigrationhttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/valu-v-minister-immigrationIn one of Australia's first AI-citation cases, a solicitor before the Federal Circuit and Family Court cited non-existent Federal Court authorities and fabricated tribunal quotes generated by ChatGPT. Judge Skaros found the conduct fell short of competence and diligence standards and directed that it be referred to the NSW Office of the Legal Services Commissioner. Primary source: Valu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95 (AustLII); (2025) 386 FLR 365 — https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC2G/2025/95.htmlFri, 31 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-sc-gen-23-generative-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-sc-gen-23-generative-aiAmended before commencement to clarify permitted uses, the scope of the affidavit disclosure requirement, and the leave process for expert reports. Practice Note SC Gen 23 of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, issued 21 November 2024, amended 28 January 2025 and in force from 3 February 2025. It prohibits using generative AI to draft affidavits, witness statements or expert reports without leave, requires affidavits to disclose that AI was not used, and holds practitioners responsible for verifying submissions. Primary source: NSW Supreme Court — Amended (commenced 3 February 2025) — https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdfTue, 28 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-oaic-guidance-commercially-available-ai-productshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-oaic-guidance-commercially-available-ai-productsUpdate to the October 2024 guidance. OAIC guidance applying the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles to organisations that deploy commercially available AI products. Privacy obligations attach to personal information input into an AI system and to output containing personal information, and the OAIC advises against putting personal information into publicly available generative AI tools. Primary source: OAIC — Updated — https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-guidance-for-organisations-and-government-agencies/guidance-on-privacy-and-the-use-of-commercially-available-ai-productsFri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-joint-statement-ai-legal-practicehttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-joint-statement-ai-legal-practiceA joint statement issued 6 December 2024 by the regulators of Victoria, New South Wales and Western Australia on how the Legal Profession Uniform Law and conduct rules apply to AI. Solicitors must not enter confidential client information into public AI tools, must verify AI output, should disclose AI use to clients where appropriate, and remain responsible for their work. Primary source: VLSB+C / LS NSW / LPBWA — Original — https://lsbc.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-12/Statement%20on%20the%20use%20of%20AI%20in%20Australian%20legal%20practice_2.pdfFri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-nsw-judges-generative-ai-guidelineshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-nsw-judges-generative-ai-guidelinesIssued by the Chief Justice of New South Wales on 21 November 2024 alongside Practice Note SC Gen 23 and developed with the other heads of jurisdiction, these guidelines apply to all courts in New South Wales. They prohibit generative AI in the reasoning and drafting of judgments and list red flags for detecting undisclosed AI use. Primary source: NSW Chief Justice — Original — https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_Generative_AI_21112024.pdfThu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-sc-gen-23-generative-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/nsw-sc-gen-23-generative-aiPractice Note SC Gen 23 of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, issued 21 November 2024, amended 28 January 2025 and in force from 3 February 2025. It prohibits using generative AI to draft affidavits, witness statements or expert reports without leave, requires affidavits to disclose that AI was not used, and holds practitioners responsible for verifying submissions. Primary source: NSW Supreme Court — Original — https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/practice-procedure/generative-artificial-intelligence.htmlThu, 21 Nov 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-oaic-guidance-commercially-available-ai-productshttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-oaic-guidance-commercially-available-ai-productsOAIC guidance applying the Privacy Act 1988 and the Australian Privacy Principles to organisations that deploy commercially available AI products. Privacy obligations attach to personal information input into an AI system and to output containing personal information, and the OAIC advises against putting personal information into publicly available generative AI tools. Primary source: OAIC — Original — https://www.oaic.gov.au/privacy/privacy-guidance-for-organisations-and-government-agencies/guidance-on-privacy-and-the-use-of-commercially-available-ai-productsMon, 21 Oct 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/tracker/dayal-fedcfamc2f-1166https://safelegalai.com/tracker/dayal-fedcfamc2f-1166In Australia's Federal Circuit and Family Court, a Victorian solicitor tendered four non-existent authorities generated by the AI tool in his LEAP practice software. Judge Humphreys referred him to the Victorian Legal Services Board and Commissioner, which in August 2025 barred him from practising as a principal and imposed two years of supervised practice. Primary source: Dayal [2024] FedCFamC2F 1166 (AustLII) — https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC2F/2024/1166.htmlTue, 27 Aug 2024 00:00:00 GMTincidentaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-qld-sc-pd-14-2024-expert-evidence-genaihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/au-qld-sc-pd-14-2024-expert-evidence-genaiQueensland's expert-evidence practice direction for criminal proceedings contains the most granular AI disclosure requirement in Australia: where an expert used generative AI to formulate or express an opinion, the report must name the program used and annex complete records of the prompts given and of the outputs delivered. Primary source: Supreme Court of Queensland — Commenced 15 July 2024 (subsequently amended) — https://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/797050/scpd-14-of-2024.pdfMon, 15 Jul 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/qls-guidance-statement-37-aihttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/qls-guidance-statement-37-aiGuidance Statement No. 37 from the Queensland Law Society, issued 31 May 2024, applies the Australian Solicitors Conduct Rules to solicitors' use of AI. It is permissive with cautions: solicitors must be competent in the tools they use, protect confidentiality, verify output before reliance, supervise staff use, and consider whether to inform clients about AI use. Primary source: QLS — Original — https://www.qls.com.au/practising-law-in-qld/ethics/guidance-statements/no-37-artificial-intelligence-in-legal-practiceFri, 31 May 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/qld-courts-generative-ai-guidelines-non-lawyershttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/qld-courts-generative-ai-guidelines-non-lawyersGuidelines published by Queensland Courts in May 2024 for self-represented litigants using generative AI. They caution that AI chatbots can produce inaccurate or fabricated legal content, that users must verify everything against official sources before relying on it in court, and that private or confidential information should not be entered into public tools. Primary source: Queensland Courts — May 2024 — https://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0010/867502/artificial-intelligence-guidelines-for-non-lawyers.pdfWed, 01 May 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustraliahttps://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-supreme-court-litigant-ai-guidelines-2024https://safelegalai.com/regulation/australia/vic-supreme-court-litigant-ai-guidelines-2024Guidelines issued by the Supreme Court of Victoria in May 2024 for litigants and practitioners using AI in litigation. They asked parties to understand the tools they used, verify output, and disclose AI use where it was material to a document before the court. They were replaced on 14 May 2026 by Practice Note SC GEN 25. Primary source: Supreme Court of Victoria — May 2024 — https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/forms-fees-and-services/forms-templates-and-guidelines/guideline-responsible-use-of-ai-in-litigationWed, 01 May 2024 00:00:00 GMTregulationaustralia