Selected Canadian Legal Decisions and Directives Regarding Generative AI

[22 Jul 2025]

Topic: Use of Generative AI Tools – Human Oversight

Zhang v. Chen (2024 BCSC 285)

This BC Supreme Court case included an issue involving a lawyer who submitted two fabricated case citations generated by ChatGPT. Justice Masuhara commented as follows:

As this case has unfortunately made clear, generative AI is still no substitute for the professional expertise that the justice system requires of lawyers. Competence in the selection and use of any technology tools, including those powered by AI, is critical. The integrity of the justice system requires no less. (para. 46) 

 

Ko v. Li (2025 ONSC 2766)

This Ontario Superior Court case included an issue involving a lawyer who included AI-generated, non-existent case citations in her factum and oral submissions. Justice Myers commented as follows:

It is the lawyer’s duty to ensure human review of materials prepared by non-human technology such as generative artificial intelligence. (para. 20)

It should go without saying that it is the lawyer’s duty to read cases before submitting them to a court as precedential authorities. At its barest minimum, it is the lawyer’s duty not to submit case authorities that do not exist or that stand for the opposite of the lawyer’s submission. (para. 21)

 

Topic: Use of Generative AI Tools – Disclosure

Notice from the Federal Court (07 May 2024)

The Federal Court issued a notice to the legal profession regarding the use of AI in court proceedings, including a requirement for a declaration of when and how AI tools have been used.

To ensure that the Court understands the role AI has played in the preparation of materials for the purpose of litigation, and submitted to the Court by or on behalf of a party or intervener, such materials must include the Declaration whenever they contain content created or generated directly by AI. (p. 1)

 

Copyright Considerations for AI