Lawyers warned against using fake AI citations

The Law Society of South Africa (LSSA) has warned that lawyers who mislead the court with fake, AI-generated citations face being struck off the roll. It said submitting bogus AI-produced information, even by mistake, is serious misconduct. The Independent on Saturday says the warning follows a growing number of cases that have been jeopardised because of inaccurate AI content, in SA and abroad. Speaking for the LSSA, Azhar Aziz-Ismail, chairperson of the Johannesburg Attorneys Association, stressed that when using AI, every output must be verified, with ‘no shortcuts and no excuses’. ‘Submitting court documents that contain AI-generated, fictitious case citations constitutes serious professional misconduct, regardless of whether this occurs knowingly or unknowingly. Such matters are referred to the Legal Practice Council (LPC) for a disciplinary hearing.’ He warned that the penalties could be severe; ranging from fines and suspension to being struck off the roll, depending on the circumstances and gravity of the misconduct. ‘Beyond formal sanctions, attorneys also face significant reputational damage, which can have lasting consequences for their careers and professional standing,’ said Aziz-Ismail.

Aziz-Ismail noted local and international case law emphasised that lawyers are expected and required to verify all information, including that generated by AI, before using it in any official legal capacity. ‘In practise, this means that AI should be treated as a tool to assist with legal research and productivity, not as an unquestioned authority, and every output must be rigorously checked to maintain the integrity of the justice system.’ According to The Independent on Saturday, he cited two incidents where lawyers were called out for using non-existent case law. He said in Mavundla v MEC Department of Co-operative Government & Traditional Affairs, and Northbound Processing (Pty) Ltd v SA Diamond & Precious Metals Regulator & Others, the courts emphasised that legal practitioners must exercise due diligence and verify the accuracy and existence of all citations and authorities. ‘The Mavundla judgment, in particular, highlighted that all information or citations generated by AI must be thoroughly verified before use in legal proceedings or documents, and that attorneys are responsible for supervising staff work and ensuring research accuracy, regardless of its source,’ he said. Aziz-Ismail said the courts have made it ‘abundantly clear’ that lawyers are not absolved of their ethical and professional duties when using AI. ‘The stakes are high, not just for us as practitioners, but for public trust in the justice system. Additionally, there are broader risks that must be addressed when using AI, including intellectual property, data protection, confidentiality and legal professional privilege among others –all of which require careful consideration to ensure the responsible and ethical use of these technologies in legal practice.’ He said to date the LSSA had not received AI-related complaints regarding legal practitioners but if this arose it would be reported to the LPC for investigation and appropriate action.

Full report in The Independent on Saturday