The growing use of artificial intelligence in court cases risks bogus laws being cited as fact, Scotland’s top judge has warned.

Lord Pentland said AI is being used ‘more and more’ but flaws in the system mean fictitious legislation has been referred to in court cases.

This is because AI software used for legal research can ‘hallucinate’ by presenting non-existent laws as fact, which are then regurgitated, risking contempt of court.

In a speech, Lord Pentland said ‘generative AI assistants’ should be considered as a ‘tool to support judicial work, not as a substitute for it’.

A spokesman for the Judicial Office for Scotland told the Mail: ‘The Lord President made specific reference to the use of AI by unrepresented parties, leading to longer and sometimes flawed submissions, which has been a noticeable recent trend.

‘In addition, aware of cases in other jurisdictions and the risks that they highlight, he urged all those appearing in court, including legal practitioners, to exercise particular care.’

The Lord President made the comments during a speech in Edinburgh to mark the opening of the Scottish legal year, in which he also warned of a surge in serious criminal cases putting more pressure on courts, making the status quo is ‘no longer sustainable’.

He said ‘generative AI is being used more and more by unrepresented parties and, while it holds some promise as a way of facilitating their access to justice, it also introduces considerable risk for those who rely on it uncritically’.

Lord Pentland warned of the risks of AI being used in court cases

The judge added: ‘Neither the court nor other parties appreciate their time being wasted with the citation of hallucinated court cases, the assertion of belief as fact or reference to legislation which does not exist.’

Lord Pentland admitted that ‘all of these have happened in our courts and the bar for contempt of court is perilously close to being met’.

He said the legal profession needs to understand ‘both the capabilities and limitations of what can be achieved by AI’.

Lord Pentland said: ‘The judiciary are expected to be fully informed about the risks and benefits of a particular AI tool prior to its use, and the judiciary will receive appropriate training and support as the integrity of the judiciary is of the utmost importance.’

He said he would ‘urge tempered enthusiasm for AI’ among lawyers, adding: ‘The legal profession in Scotland must continue to embrace technology if it is to compete and thrive.’

Lord Pentland said AI ‘has the potential to assist in our daily work and thereby support a more effective and efficient justice system’.

He added: ‘Equally, its use is not without risk and it must be used critically if those high standards are to continue to be met.’

In June 2025, the High Court in England and Wales issued a stern warning after two separate cases involving fake authorities.

One case involved judicial review proceedings where five cited authorities did not exist.

Another involved a claimant relying on 45 authorities, 18 of which were fictitious, with bogus quotations in others.

Following those cases, Dame Victoria Sharp, President of the King’s Bench Division, warned that misuse of AI posed ‘serious implications for the administration of justice’ and said lawyers could potentially face sanctions, contempt proceedings and regulatory referrals.

One senior Scottish defence lawyer, who asked not to be named, said the use of AI was ‘becoming an increasing problem dealing with correspondence from party litigants drafted by AI, where the law quoted is very inaccurate’.

He said: ‘I had a recent example where I’d told a client a plea to driving under the influence of cannabis had to inevitably lead to disqualification.

‘He replied with his “research” showing I was wrong, which quoted a case that would have been great – if only it hadn’t come from Saskatchewan.

‘The difficulty is we still have to spend time reading this rubbish to check there isn’t some nugget of useful info buried amongst the slop.’

Meanwhile, Lord Pentland said the justice system faced a surge in serious criminal cases, heaping ‘unprecedented demands on our courts and tribunals’.

He said: ‘In 2024, the Crown typically lodged less than 100 indictments a month.

‘That is, less than 100 cases of serious criminal offending brought to the High Court each month.

‘That figure has grown to an average of over 150 a month today.’

He said by the ‘Crown’s own estimates, it is expected to reach over 200 per month in the course of this legal year’.

Lord Pentland said: ‘In other words, there will soon be more than twice as many serious criminal cases coming to the High Court each month than just two years ago.’

On the pressures facing the courts, Lord Pentland said: ‘The new reality facing the High Court is characterised by both a higher volume of cases and greater complexity in those cases.’

But he said the ‘capacity of the system is finite and adaptations of the existing model can only take us so far’.

He said: ‘The status quo is no longer sustainable and modernisation is no longer optional.’