In Bangladesh and other common law jurisdictions, court decisions rely heavily on pleadings and arguments submitted by lawyers. A growing concern is the reliance on generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools by legal professionals, which can lead to the inclusion of hallucinated or non-existent legal citations in court filings. A recent example occurred in the US state of Georgia, where the Supreme Court vacated a trial court order in the case of Payne v State (2026) because it contained fictitious citations prepared by a prosecutor using AI. Similarly, in March 2026, a California appellate court upheld a trial court order in In re Domestic Partnership of Torres Campos and Munoz despite it relying on non-existent cases, as the appellant had forfeited the right to challenge the decision. These incidents highlight a broader trend, including the well-publicized Mata v. Avianca case in 2023, where fake precedents were submitted to a New York court. Legal professionals remain personally responsible for the accuracy of their filings, regardless of the technology used. Cognitive biases, such as automation bias and the plausible appearance of AI-generated content, make these errors difficult for opposing counsel and judges to detect. When judges incorporate these submissions into court orders without verification, the misinformation gains legal authority, creating significant challenges for the judicial process and potentially necessitating lengthy and costly reviews.

বাংলাদেশ সময়: ১৮:৪৬:৪৬   ১৪ বার পঠিত   #AI Hallucination  #Artificial Intelligence  #Court Procedure  #Judiciary  #Legal Ethics  #Legal Technology