\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
![\"Alissa](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/12\/3806730_web1_251222-Courts-AI-00105.jpg\")
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n
Alissa Schacter, the Law Society of Manitoba\u2019s director of policy and strategic initiatives (Mikaela MacKenzie \/ Free Press)<\/p>\n
It turns out the cases had been \u201challucinated,\u201d with the lawyer admitting he neglected to check the work of an artificial intelligence tool used by Canadian immigration lawyers.<\/p>\n
Instead of seeking the court\u2019s forgiveness, he doubled down, arguing his undeclared and unverified use of AI did not substantially impact his legal argument. But Moore wasn\u2019t buying it, particularly since the Federal Court, along with many other judiciaries across Canada, have ordered that all uses of artificial intelligence be properly referenced by lawyers appearing in their courtrooms.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe use of generative artificial intelligence is increasingly common and a perfectly valid tool for counsel to use; however, in this Court, its use must be declared and as a matter of both practice, good sense and professionalism, its output must be verified by a human,\u201d Moore wrote in an April decision.<\/p>\n
The lawyer\u2019s undisclosed use of AI amounted to an attempt to mislead the court, she said, and potentially warranted a penalty.<\/p>\n
The case serves as a cautionary tale, as the use of AI tools \u2014 some purpose-built for the law profession \u2014 proliferates.<\/p>\n
The Law Society of Manitoba, the regulatory body overseeing the profession in the province, is advising its members to be smart about their use of the technology and have issued guidelines dictating how to use it responsibly.<\/p>\n
Alissa Schacter, the society\u2019s director of policy and strategic initiatives, said the overarching message is lawyers are ultimately responsible for their work \u2014 including any generated by AI.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe same way, you know, if you have an articling student or a junior associate that you\u2019re supervising, you wouldn\u2019t submit their work without checking it. Well, it\u2019s no different with AI,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
Manitoba lawyers have been slow to turn to the technology, the Free Press has found, despite an order from Court of King\u2019s bench Chief Justice Glenn Joyal in June 2023 that all uses of AI in submissions prepared for the King\u2019s Bench be disclosed.<\/p>\n
\u201cBased on feedback from the bench, there have been very few, if any,\u201d said Elissa Neville, executive legal officer for Manitoba Courts.<\/p>\n
\u201cAt the time the practice direction was issued, the Court of King\u2019s Bench was becoming increasingly aware of the potential use of AI in submissions. It wanted to let both parties and the legal profession know that the court was giving attention to the issue,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n
\u201cIt also wanted to provide a mechanism through which the court could be alerted to the use of AI in order to conduct its own verifications and assessments, if necessary, as to the reliability and credibility of the materials being filed.\u201d<\/p>\n
Neither the provincial court nor the Manitoba Court of Appeal have yet to issue guidelines for the use of AI.<\/p>\n
Much of the law society\u2019s guidelines align with obligations lawyers already have under their professional code of conduct, Schacter said.<\/p>\n
\u201cLawyers have an obligation to be technologically competent\u2026 and obviously what that means evolves as technology evolves, which is very rapidly these days,\u201d Schacter said.<\/p>\n
\u201cSo if you\u2019re going to use AI, it means you have a duty to understand how the particular tool works. What it\u2019s doing with your information.\u2026 Is there the potential for privileged information or confidential client information to be compromised? \u2026 Educate yourself about how the tool works.\u201d<\/p>\n
The potential for fake cases and inaccuracies must be top of mind, Schacter said, as AI can often produce results that seem credible, lulling users into a sense of complacency.<\/p>\n
Schacter said she\u2019s heard mixed reports, with some lawyers using AI tools for specific tasks, such as editing emails or as dictation software, while others have found it too inaccurate to be useful.<\/p>\n
\u201cMy sense is overall that the legal community in Manitoba and, again, broadly speaking is, to varying degrees, testing it out in different ways,\u201d she said. \u201cBut I certainly don\u2019t think it\u2019s revolutionized practice here yet.\u201d<\/p>\n
The Manitoba Bar Association has found its members being careful with using AI.<\/p>\n
\u201cI think our members are generally interested in the new technology and the opportunities that it provides,\u201d said Jason Gisser, a lawyer and the chair of the association\u2019s joint committee on the study of artificial intelligence in the Manitoba legal profession.<\/p>\n
\u201cBut I think they\u2019re approaching it cautiously, in order to ensure that it can be used responsibly.\u201d<\/p>\n
\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t Glenn Joyal, Chief Justice of the Court of King\u2019s Bench of Manitoba (Mike Deal \/ Free Press files)<\/p>\n The committee \u2014 made up of representatives from the bar association, the University of Manitoba\u2019s law school, court officials, the law students\u2019 association and various law firms \u2014 was struck to study, monitor and discuss the evolution of AI and its impact, as well as the potential challenges and opportunities it presents. The bar association also conducted a survey over the summer on the subject.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat we found was a variety of opinions on AI, like you might find in any profession that\u2019s trying to grapple with this new technology\u2026 there were a variety of levels of AI utilization at this point,\u201d Gisser said.<\/p>\n \u201cDifferent uses that were mentioned in the survey results were things like assistance with drafting, review of documents, translating documents, legal research, as well as things like\u2026 assistance with marketing.\u201d<\/p>\n Gisser said the survey also found there\u2019s an expectation that as the technology continues to rapidly evolve, it will likely become commonplace in the profession, much like email and the internet have over the years.<\/p>\n \u201cThey may be expected to use it for the benefit of their clients. And so, that comes with the responsibility to learn how to use the technology,\u201d said Gisser.<\/p>\n Katie Szilagyi, an assistant professor in the faculty of law at the U of M, focused on AI in the justice system for her doctoral thesis.<\/p>\n She said the Canadian administrative state has already begun to adopt the technology, via more traditional forms of artificial intelligence: risk-assessment instruments, advanced actuarial methodologies and algorithmic measures meant to replace things that used to be done by people.<\/p>\n \u201cThe administrative state, although it isn\u2019t one of the sexier areas of law, tends to be the area that most people interact with when they interact with our legal system,\u201d said Szilagyi, citing tribunals for employment insurance, the Canada Revenue Agency and immigration as examples.<\/p>\n \u201cThis does tend to be an area that is primed for some degrees of automation due to high volume, repetitive transactions that people are beginning to simplify through automation, where possible\u2026 But seeing the creep of automated systems in different parts of government is definitely something that we want to be aware of.\u201d<\/p>\n Generative AI tools such as ChatGPT becoming widely available in recent years, however, is the other side of the equation, as it continues to produce language \u201cthat is statistically generated in order to mimic what human language looks like,\u201d Szilagyi said.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd because lawyers\u2019 stock and trade is in words, it is often something that people are excited about using to increase efficiencies in the legal workplace.\u201d<\/p>\n There is worry among some in the profession that generative artificial intelligence may supplant the work traditionally done by junior staffers, limiting opportunity.<\/p>\n \u201cI think people are of two minds about that. To some degree, there is concern that this work will be displaced in terms of the entry-level tasks that were traditionally available,\u201d said Szilagyi.<\/p>\n \n\t\tWinnipeg Free Press | Newsletter\n\t<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t\t \u201cBut at the same time, we see the workplace change and grow significantly every time a new technology is introduced. And I think students who are fairly savvy users and consumers of technology do understand that transformation sometimes creates new opportunities.\u201d<\/p>\n She said it\u2019s possible there will be new jobs for young lawyers in the future that have not yet been conceptualized, as a result of AI.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think AI is going away anytime soon. I also don\u2019t think it\u2019s the panacea that some people think it is. It\u2019s not going to completely transform the world and change things, but it is here to stay,\u201d she said.<\/p>\n \u201cAnd so, how do we understand how to work with it? How do we understand its limitations?\u201d<\/p>\n erik.pindera@freepress.mb.ca<\/p>\n \t\t\t\t Erik Pindera Erik Pindera is a reporter for the Free Press, mostly focusing on crime and justice. The born-and-bred Winnipegger attended Red River College Polytechnic, wrote for the community newspaper in Kenora, Ont. and reported on television and radio in Winnipeg before joining the Free Press in 2020.\u00a0 Read more about Erik<\/a>.<\/p>\n Every piece of reporting Erik produces is reviewed by an editing team before it is posted online or published in print \u2014 part of the Free Press\u2018s tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press\u2019s history and mandate<\/a>, and learn how our newsroom operates<\/a>.<\/p>\n
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
Reporter
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n