Victorian Supreme Court AI Guidelines: What Lawyers and Litigants Must Know

The Supreme Court of Victoria released its landmark "Guidelines for Litigants: Responsible Use of Artificial Intelligence in Litigation" on May 6, 2024, becoming one of the first Australian courts to provide comprehensive guidance on AI use in legal proceedings. Unlike NSW's more restrictive practice note, Victoria has taken a guidance-based approach that emphasises transparency, professional responsibility, and informed use of AI tools.

For Victorian legal practitioners and litigants, understanding these guidelines is essential for responsible AI integration into litigation practice.

Overview of the Victorian AI Guidelines

The Victorian Supreme Court's guidelines are designed to assist both legal practitioners and self-represented litigants in understanding appropriate AI use in court proceedings. Rather than imposing strict prohibitions, the guidelines establish principles and expectations that emphasise professional judgment and transparency.

The court has made clear that while AI tools can assist with legal work, they come with significant limitations that practitioners must understand and address.

Core Principles of the Guidelines

1. Understanding AI Tools and Their Limitations

The guidelines place a strong emphasis on users understanding how AI tools function. This includes recognising that:

• Generative AI is not a legal research tool: Large Language Models create output based on probability, not legal reasoning
• AI output should not be presumed correct: Unlike traditional legal databases, AI systems can generate plausible but inaccurate information
• Commercial and public AI platforms pose higher risks: General-purpose tools like ChatGPT and Google Gemini are more likely to produce inaccurate results for current litigation matters

2. Privacy and Confidentiality

The guidelines warn that privacy and confidentiality of information provided to external AI programs may not be guaranteed. Users should:

• Be aware of how AI platforms handle data
• Avoid providing private, confidential, suppressed, or legally privileged information to chatbots
• Consider whether using an AI tool could compromise client confidentiality

3. Avoiding Misleading Conduct

A critical principle is that AI use must not mislead any participant in the litigation process. This includes:

• Not misleading the court about the nature of work undertaken
• Not misrepresenting content produced by AI as original human work
• Being transparent about the role AI played in document preparation

4. Disclosure Requirements

The guidelines establish clear expectations around disclosure:

Between Parties and Practitioners: Ordinarily, parties and their legal practitioners should disclose to each other the assistance provided by AI programs.

To the Court: Disclosure is particularly appropriate when it is necessary for:

• A proper understanding of a document's origin
• Assessing the weight that can be placed upon a document's contents

Self-Represented Litigants: Those preparing documents with generative AI are encouraged to identify this, including specifying which AI tool was used.

Professional Responsibility Remains Paramount

The Victorian guidelines make clear that lawyers remain fully responsible for the accuracy, completeness, and applicability of any AI-generated information. Key points include:

No Diminished Responsibility

Reliance on generative AI does not relieve legal practitioners of the need to exercise professional judgment and skill in reviewing the final product. The lawyer's signature on a document carries the same professional obligations whether AI was used or not.

Verification Obligations

While the Victorian guidelines don't prescribe specific verification procedures like NSW's Practice Note, the expectation is clear: all AI-generated content must be reviewed and verified by the responsible practitioner.

Professional Conduct Rules Apply

Standard professional conduct obligations—including duties of candour to the court, confidentiality to clients, and competence in practice—continue to apply regardless of what tools are used.

Guidance for Self-Represented Litigants

The Victorian guidelines provide specific guidance for self-represented litigants and witnesses who use AI:

• Disclosure is encouraged: Self-represented litigants should identify when generative AI was used to prepare documents
• Specify the tool: Where AI is used, identify which AI tool was employed
• Understand limitations: Self-represented litigants should be aware that AI tools may produce incorrect legal information

This guidance is particularly important given the increasing use of AI tools by people navigating the legal system without professional assistance.

The Court's Own Position on AI

The Victorian Supreme Court has been transparent about its own approach to AI:

• No AI for decision-making: AI is not currently used by judicial officers for decision-making
• No AI for developing reasons: Judges do not use AI in developing reasons for decisions
• AI lacks case-specific reasoning: The court recognises that AI does not engage in the reasoning process specific to circumstances before the court

This transparency helps litigants understand that judicial decisions remain the product of human legal reasoning, not algorithmic processes.

Comparison: Victoria vs NSW vs Federal Court

Practical Implications for Victorian Practitioners

What You Should Do

1. Understand your AI tools: Know how they work and their limitations before using them
2. Maintain verification practices: Review all AI-generated content for accuracy
3. Be prepared to disclose: Have processes in place to track and disclose AI assistance
4. Protect confidential information: Don't enter privileged or confidential material into AI platforms
5. Use professional legal AI tools: Purpose-built legal AI platforms like Numbat.ai offer better accuracy and citation verification

What You Should Avoid

1. Don't assume AI output is correct: Verify all citations, legal principles, and case references
2. Don't mislead about AI use: Be transparent with opposing parties and the court
3. Don't compromise confidentiality: Think carefully before entering client information into any AI platform
4. Don't abdicate professional responsibility: You remain accountable for all work product

The Law Institute of Victoria's Additional Guidance

In September 2025, the Law Institute of Victoria (LIV) published comprehensive guidelines for ethical AI use in legal practice, supplementing the Supreme Court's guidelines. The LIV guidelines address:

• Confidentiality considerations
• Output verification requirements
• Transparency expectations
• Professional responsibility obligations

Together, the Supreme Court guidelines and LIV guidance provide Victorian practitioners with a comprehensive framework for responsible AI use.

The Victorian Law Reform Commission's AI Project

The Victorian Law Reform Commission (VLRC) has been conducting an ongoing project examining AI in Victoria's courts and tribunals. The project includes:

• A consultation paper released in October 2024
• Extensive stakeholder engagement
• Analysis of AI implications for the justice system

The VLRC's work may lead to additional guidance or legislative changes affecting how AI is used in Victorian legal proceedings.

Using AI Responsibly in Victorian Courts

The Victorian approach reflects a balanced philosophy: acknowledging AI's potential benefits while ensuring transparency and professional accountability. For practitioners, this means:

Embracing Professional Legal AI

Tools like Numbat.ai are designed to address many concerns raised in the Victorian guidelines:

• Verified Australian sources: Responses are grounded in actual Australian legal databases
• Transparent citations: Every answer includes links to verifiable case law and legislation
• RAG technology: Reduces hallucination risks by retrieving from verified sources
• Data security: Australian servers with appropriate privacy protections

Maintaining Human Judgment

AI should augment, not replace, professional legal judgment. The Victorian guidelines implicitly endorse an approach where:

• AI handles initial research and drafting
• Lawyers review, verify, and take responsibility for final work product
• Disclosure is made where appropriate
• Professional standards are maintained throughout

Conclusion

The Victorian Supreme Court's AI guidelines represent a thoughtful, principles-based approach to AI regulation in legal proceedings. Unlike NSW's more restrictive Practice Note, Victoria emphasises professional judgment and transparency while leaving practitioners latitude in how they use AI tools.

For Victorian lawyers and litigants, the key message is clear: AI can be a valuable tool, but its use requires understanding, verification, and transparency. Practitioners who embrace these principles while using purpose-built legal AI tools will be well-positioned to harness AI's benefits while meeting their professional obligations.

---

This guide reflects the Victorian Supreme Court's Guidelines for Litigants as published on May 6, 2024, along with subsequent developments from the Law Institute of Victoria and Victorian Law Reform Commission. Practitioners should consult the Supreme Court of Victoria website for the most current information.