Since the rapid growth and free access of Generative AI tools like ChatGPT 3.5 earlier and increasing popularity of similar tools like Claude AI, Copilot, Gemini etc many people including Advocates and Lawyers began to use these tools as an assistant. The ease of use and reliability on spellings, grammatical correctness and speed of the output helps in saving time, energy, effort and cost – leading to increased use and wider adoption. However the creativity of these tools sometimes leads to them providing unrealistic, unverified and unsubstantiated content while not informing the user that these are not facts. Many time due to lack of awareness of how these tools give their output and also blindly believing the outputs to be factual, time and again despite blunders coming to notice from across the world, Adocates have used these Generative AI tools’ generated content without verification which range from hilarious to absurd and foolish to dangerous, utting at stake law, justice and ethics. This paper studies some of these instances and makes a case for regulating use of Generative AI by Advocates and Lawyers either by using Explainable AI tools in place of Generative AI tools or by taking declaration for having used or not used Generative AI in their draftings/pleadings and having verified the contents if these are generated using AI.
Dr. Praveen Nayak (Fri,) studied this question.