As artificial intelligence (AI) increasingly integrates into the legal domain, Supreme Court Justice B.R. Gavai has urged caution in its application, highlighting the risks of misinformation, ethical dilemmas, and the erosion of human judgment in judiciary processes.
Speaking at two separate events—the Supreme Court of Kenya’s conference and a lecture at the University of Nairobi—Justice Gavai addressed the critical challenges posed by AI in the judiciary and legal education. While acknowledging its benefits in streamlining case management, he warned against the unchecked reliance on AI for legal research, citing instances where generative AI tools have fabricated legal precedents.
Judiciary’s Use of AI Must be Carefully Regulated
Justice Gavai expressed concern over AI-generated legal research, pointing to recent cases where courts unknowingly cited fictitious precedents. He referenced a December 2023 incident involving the Bengaluru bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), which mistakenly relied on non-existent Supreme Court and Madras High Court judgments in a tax dispute involving Buckeye Trust. The tribunal later withdrew the order in January, citing “inadvertent errors.”
“AI can process vast amounts of legal data and provide quick summaries, but it lacks the ability to verify sources with human discernment. This has led to situations where lawyers and researchers, trusting AI-generated information, have unknowingly cited non-existent cases, resulting in professional embarrassment and potential legal consequences,” Justice Gavai stated.
He stressed that while AI tools could enhance efficiency, they must not replace human reasoning, especially in legal interpretation. “Justice is not merely about facts—it involves ethical considerations, empathy, and contextual understanding that AI lacks,” he added.
AI in Legal Education: A Tool, Not a Replacement
At the University of Nairobi, Justice Gavai underscored the need for legal education to focus on critical evaluation of AI-generated content to ensure accuracy and legal validity. “To promote responsible AI usage, legal education must emphasise the critical review of AI-generated content for accuracy and legal validity. AI tools should be viewed as supplements rather than replacements for human legal reasoning,” he said.
The Supreme Court judge also stressed that students must verify AI-generated citations to avoid plagiarism and misinformation. “Educators should incorporate case studies highlighting instances where AI has failed or resulted in unethical legal outcomes. Just as legal professionals disclose conflicts of interest, students should acknowledge the use of AI tools in research and writing,” he suggested.
Justice Gavai pointed out that the rapid expansion of digital platforms and blockchain technology has introduced complex legal challenges, requiring a nuanced approach from law schools. He recommended that institutions establish clear guidelines on AI-assisted plagiarism, ensuring transparency in the use of AI-generated legal content.
Also read: India Plans AI Oversight Board for Governance
Balancing Innovation with Ethical Considerations
As AI continues to reshape legal research and judicial decision-making, Justice Gavai emphasized the need for robust oversight mechanisms. His call for caution follows global concerns over AI’s potential to mislead, distort legal outcomes, and amplify biases.
The judiciary, he insisted, must ensure that AI serves as an aid rather than a substitute for human judgment, reinforcing trust in the legal system. “AI is being explored as a tool to predict court outcomes, sparking debates about its role in judicial decision-making. However, we must recognize that justice involves more than just data-driven predictions—it requires ethical considerations and human oversight,” he concluded.
Justice Gavai is next in line to become the Chief Justice of India in May 2025, a role in which he is expected to shape India’s legal approach to AI integration while balancing technological advancements with judicial integrity.
