Checking AI-Generated Legal Advice: A Plain-English Guide

In short: AI chatbots such as ChatGPT, Copilot, Gemini and Google's AI Overview can help you understand words and organise your thoughts. But they get the law wrong, they make up cases, and they tend to tell you what you want to hear. You are responsible for everything you put in front of the court, so check it all against official sources before you rely on it.

Why this matters

More and more people going through the family court without a lawyer are turning to AI for help. That's understandable. It's free, it's available at 2am, and it sounds confident.

The courts know this is happening. Guidance for judges says AI chatbots "may be the only source of advice or assistance some litigants receive," and that litigants "rarely have the skills independently to verify legal information provided by AI chatbots" (Courts and Tribunals Judiciary AI guidance). If a judge thinks you have used AI, they may ask you about it, ask what checks you made, and remind you that you are responsible for what you put to the court (same guidance).

The four big problems with AI legal advice

1. It makes things up

This is often called "hallucination". The AI produces case names, quotations or rules that sound real but do not exist.

In one tax tribunal case, a litigant in person relied on nine tribunal decisions. None of them were genuine; they had been produced by an AI system. The tribunal accepted she didn't know, but she still lost her appeal (Harber v HMRC, summarised by the Society for Computers and Law).

In a High Court case, 18 of the 45 citations put before the court did not exist. Many of the rest did not say what they were claimed to say. The client had generated the research using publicly available AI tools (Ayinde v Haringey and Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin)).

The High Court said plainly that freely available AI tools "are not capable of conducting reliable legal research" (same judgment).

2. It tells you what you want to hear

AI tools are designed to be helpful and agreeable. That can make them "sycophantic": they agree with you, back up your view of the other parent, and overstate your chances.

A November 2026 report for the Nuffield Family Justice Observatory warns that people who use this kind of AI can become more convinced they are right and less willing to repair relationships. It also warns of "vibe lawyering", which means being encouraged to go to court because the AI has exaggerated your chances of winning (Law Gazette).

In family cases this matters a great deal. The court is focused on the welfare of your children, or on a fair financial outcome, not on who "wins".

3. It may not be the right law, or the current law

AI may give you:

• law from Scotland, Northern Ireland or the USA instead of England and Wales;
• rules that have changed;
• civil court procedure (the Civil Procedure Rules) instead of family court procedure (the Family Procedure Rules).

The same report notes that AI search results are less likely than ordinary search engines to point you to official sources (Law Gazette).

4. It is not private

Judges are told to treat anything typed into a public AI chatbot as "being published to all the world" (judicial AI guidance). Take the same approach.

Family proceedings, especially about children, are private. There are strict rules about who you can share court documents and information with. Do not paste in court orders, Cafcass or social work reports, expert reports, statements, or names and details of your children or the other party. If you're not sure whether something can be shared, don't share it. Ask the court or get advice first.

New: the family mediation regulator has issued a warning (November 2026)

In November 2026 the Family Mediation Council (FMC), the body for regulated family mediation in England and Wales, publicly urged separating couples not to rely on AI chatbots when making life-changing decisions. Its chief executive, Helen Anthony, said AI tools simply cannot replace "expertise, training and human judgement".

Her warning comes in a few parts, and each one is worth knowing:

• It sounds like it knows you. It doesn't. "It gives you the same answer it would give anyone else with roughly the same question, cleverly dressed up to sound personal."
• A convincing voice is not an expert one. Chatbots are designed to sound warm, attentive and reassuring, which can be misleading at a vulnerable, high-stakes moment.
• Nobody is accountable for it. An AI tool "has no training in family dynamics, no accountability for the advice it gives, and no ability to read what is really happening between two people".
• People often end up more confused, not less. Mediators increasingly report clients arriving having tried an AI tool or a search engine first, and feeling less clear than before.

Family lawyers are seeing the same pattern from the other side. Clients are arriving at first consultations having already asked an AI to sketch out their own divorce settlement. Stephanie Douthwaite, a partner at Harrogate Family Law, described the balance lawyers now have to strike: welcoming the effort people have made, while making sure "DIY disasters" don't derail the proceedings. AI can explain a basic legal concept, she said, but it lacks the nuance, strategy and professional discretion that fact-specific law requires.

Helen Anthony put the choice plainly: "Separation is not a generic problem with a generic answer. It's your children, your home, your money and debts. It's your future."

What this means for you: keep using AI to understand words, organise your thoughts and prepare questions. For the decisions themselves, meaning arrangements for your children, the home, and money, use a person who is trained, insured and accountable: a registered family mediator, a solicitor, or a McKenzie Friend to help you prepare and keep you organised.

Reported by Today's Family Lawyer in November 2026.

A simple checking routine

Use this every time AI gives you something you might rely on.

Step 1: Ask "where does it say that?"

Ask the AI for the exact source: the name of the Act and section number, the rule number, or the full case name and citation. If it can't give you one, treat the answer as unreliable.

Step 2: Look it up yourself in an official source

Never rely on the AI's summary of a source. Open the source itself.

What AI mentioned	Where to check it
An Act of Parliament (e.g. Children Act 1989)	legislation.gov.uk (check the version is "latest available" and look for any warnings about changes not yet included)
A court rule or Practice Direction	Family Procedure Rules (not the Civil Procedure Rules)
A court case	Find Case Law (The National Archives) or BAILII
Court forms, fees and processes	GOV.UK
Guidance from judges	Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

Step 3: Check that a case really says what AI claims

Finding the case is not enough. Real cases are often cited for things they don't actually say.

• Search the judgment for the quote AI gave you. Is it there, word for word?
• Read the relevant paragraphs. Does the case support your point, or does it say the opposite?
• Was it a family case? Was it decided in England and Wales?
• Has it been overturned or overtaken by a later case?

If you can't find a case on Find Case Law or BAILII, do not use it.

Step 4: Run the "other side" test

Because AI tends to agree with you, deliberately ask it to argue against you:

• "What would the other parent's best arguments be?"
• "What would a judge be worried about in my position?"
• "What are the weaknesses in what I've written?"

If the AI suddenly finds lots of problems, that tells you its first answer was too one-sided.

Step 5: Read every word before you send it

If AI helped you draft a statement, position statement or letter:

• Your statement must be in your own words and true. You will sign a statement of truth. Remove anything you didn't say, don't know, or can't prove.
• Cut the dramatic language. Calm, factual, short and focused on the children (or the finances) is far more persuasive than pages of AI-generated argument.
• Check names, dates, ages and figures. AI changes small details.
• Remove anything that attacks the other party but doesn't help the court decide the issue.

Step 6: Be honest if asked

If the judge asks whether you used AI, tell the truth and explain what checks you made. Courts are generally understanding with litigants in person who are open about it. They are far less understanding about false material they have to spend time untangling.

Warning signs that AI has got it wrong

Be extra careful if the AI's answer:

• cites cases you can't find on Find Case Law or BAILII;
• uses American terms such as "attorney", "custody", "visitation", "motion" or "alimony";
• promises an outcome ("you will definitely get…", "the court must…");
• sounds very sure about something that depends on your facts;
• agrees with everything you say and finds no weaknesses;
• quotes a judge in very neat, quotable sentences you can't find in the judgment;
• gives a deadline, fee or form number you haven't checked on GOV.UK.

What AI can be useful for

Used carefully, AI can genuinely help. It can be good for:

• explaining a word or phrase in plain English, and then you can check it against our glossary;
• turning your notes into a timeline, which you then check against your own records;
• making your writing clearer or shorter, as long as the meaning stays yours;
• preparing questions to ask a McKenzie Friend, a mediator, Cafcass or a solicitor;
• thinking through how the other side might see things.

Think of AI as a rough first draft or a starting point for questions. Don't treat it as advice.

Quick checklist before you rely on AI

• I have not put private court documents or my children's details into a public AI tool.
• Every Act, rule and case is one I have opened and read myself on an official website.
• Every quote appears word for word in the original source.
• The law is for England and Wales and the family court, and it is current.
• I have asked the AI for the other side's view and the weaknesses in my case.
• My statement is true, in my own words, and I can stand behind every line.
• I'm ready to explain honestly if the judge asks whether I used AI.

Where to get human help

AI can't know your case, your children or your court. If you're unsure about something important, speak to a person:

• A McKenzie Friend can help you organise documents, understand procedure, and sanity-check what you're preparing. See our McKenzie Friend directory.
• A family solicitor can give you legal advice. Some offer fixed-fee or one-off sessions.
• Mediation may help you resolve issues without a contested hearing, and a registered family mediator is trained and accountable in a way no chatbot is. Our guide to how to prepare for a MIAM explains the first meeting.
• Our guides and glossary explain common family-court terms and steps in plain English.

This guide is general information, not legal advice. Law and procedure change, so always check official sources for the current position. Last reviewed: November 2026.