A Australian lawyer was transferred to the State Law Law Affairs Committee because he was found that he had written court documents in the immigration case, and the artificial intelligence platform had produced non -existent case citations.

In a ruling of the Federal Court of Court and the Family Court on Friday, Rania Skaros, a judge, was ruled to be ruled by the lawyer of the New South Wales State Legal Service (OLSC) office in the ruling. Mentioned a lawyer.

The court listened to the lawyer's ruling in the appeal of the administrative appeal court. In October 2024, he filed a revised application to the Federal Court of Court and the Family Court, and submitted an overview. "These two documents have cited the so -called famous quotes in the case and court judgment."

On November 19, the lawyer wrote to the court, saying that these mistakes were unintentional, and he felt sorry. At a hearing on November 25, the lawyer admitted to writing files using ChatGPT.

Sikaros said: "(Lawyer) said he had used artificial intelligence to identify Australian cases, but this provided him with an unwanted jurisprudence law." The accuracy of the content mentioned by the court also pointed out that the court and my colleagues have spent a lot of time finding the so -called authorities. "

The lawyer said in an oath to the court that he decided to use AI due to time limit and health problems.

判决说：“他访问了名为Chatgpt的网站，插入了一些单词，该网站为他准备了案件的摘要。” “他说摘要很好，因此他将当局和参考资料纳入了他的意见，而No need to check the details. "

It is said that the lawyer was very embarrassed by the incident and took measures to raise his understanding of AI.

The lawyer of the Immigration Minister argued that the lawyer failed to exercise appropriate care and abused the public interest of AI in the legal procedure, which was in line with public interest, because the abuse of AI cases should be transferred to OLSC.

"(By the Minister) proposed that this behavior will continue, and must be '' in bud ''."

Skaros said that using generating AI in legal procedures is a real and continuous development problem, which is in line with OLSC's public interest, so you can realize this behavior.

This is the second legal case in Australia. After using AI in the family court case last year in a family court case, the lawyer lawyer was introduced to the Victorian legal appealing agency. Legal cases. Quote.

In the practical notes issued by the Supreme Court of New South Wales, which will take effect in the second half of last year, the court has restricted the use of AI by lawyers in New South Wales, including the statement of the specified witness that must not be used to generate an oath. Personality reference or other materials used for evidence or for interrogation.