To cite or not to cite: How can we avoid misuse of AI in court?
With an increase in ‘hallucinated’ case law cited as evidence in courts globally, what can legal practitioners—as well as providers of AI tools and platforms—do to help safeguard against this? Sarah Speight finds out.
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk
24 December 2025 In part two of this two-part series, WIPR asks in-house counsel to reflect on 2025, and what will matter most for their teams in 2026.
15 October 2025 Artificial intelligence requires vast amounts of data, but its true value now lies in accuracy and careful curation, finds Sarah Speight.
2 July 2025 The prominent senior IP judge is known for his groundbreaking judgments on patents, AI and FRAND, such as Unwired Planet, Thaler's DABUS, and InterDigital.
26 February 2026 A ruling by South Korea’s Supreme Court finds that repurposing luxury goods for personal use doesn’t infringe trademarks, in a decision expected to draw global scrutiny.