A template for Canadian courts and tribunals, prepared by Tom Macintosh Zheng of Courtready.ca, July 2026
Context. This template accompanies a Courtready.ca study, “Can I Use AI in Court? Artificial Intelligence Policies at 249 Canadian Courts and Tribunals”, which found that two-thirds of Canadian adjudicative bodies tracked have no AI policy at all. Of the 82 that do, the author reviewed the 45 distinct policy documents behind them. That review suggests a sound policy should do three things: it requires parties to disclose their use of AI, without penalising those who do; it teaches parties how to catch AI’s errors rather than simply warning them to be careful; and it gives parties a way to correct a filing once they discover an AI-related mistake. Each of these elements already exists in a Canadian policy in force today, but no single policy combines all three.
The study is found at: https://courtready.ca/ai-in-canadian-courts/.
Effective: [DATE].
Applies to all participants (parties, lawyers, representatives, witnesses and interveners), whether or not they have a lawyer.
Tools that create new content, such as text, images, audio or video, in response to what you type. Examples: ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, Claude.1 This Direction does not apply to tools that only assist with mechanics: spell-check, grammar-check, formatting, dictation or speech-to-text.2 Be aware that ordinary search engines now show AI-written answers at the top of the results page.3
Understanding legal words, forms or procedures; organizing your thoughts; summarizing documents you already have; drafting or improving your writing; translating; simplifying language; finding starting points for research, which you must then verify.4 Using AI is not, by itself, a problem, and we will not think less of your case because you used it.5
Whatever you type into a public AI tool may be stored, reused, and seen by others, and you usually cannot get it back. Do not enter personal, financial, or confidential information into a public AI tool.6 Do not enter any part of the record or any document you received because of this proceeding.7
(a) Creating witness statements, affidavits, or anything sworn or affirmed. These must come from a real person’s own knowledge and experience.8 (b) Creating or altering photographs, video, audio, documents or messages intended as evidence.9 (c) Citing cases, laws or quotations you have not confirmed are real.10 (d) Recording, transcribing or attending a hearing (including AI note-taking bots), without our prior permission.11
AI can invent court cases that do not exist; it can also invent quotations from real cases that are not present in those cases.12 Before relying on any authority an AI tool gave you: find it on CanLII (https://www.canlii.org) or on our website; if you cannot find it, assume it does not exist and do not use it;13 read it to confirm it says what you were told it says;14 and cite it with a link to a free public source, or attach a copy.15 Do not rely on AI-written case summaries; read the decision.16
You are responsible for everything you file and everything you say at a hearing, even if AI helped prepare it.17 Appendix B sets out the steps in plain language.
6.1 If AI created or generated content in a document you file, say so in the document’s first paragraph, using the form in Appendix A.18
6.2 No declaration is needed if you only used AI to: check spelling or grammar; format; dictate; suggest changes to writing you had already created yourself;19 [translate a document into or out of a language you understand; put a document into simpler language so you can understand it; or assist you because of a disability, a literacy barrier, or a language barrier.]20
6.3 The declaration, in and of itself, will not attract any adverse inference.21
If you learn that something you filed contains a case that does not exist, an invented quotation, or inaccurate information, notify the other parties and us as soon as possible and correct or withdraw it.22
Our response will depend on the facts, including whether you had a lawyer, whether the error was honest, and whether you corrected it yourself.23 An honest mistake by an unrepresented person, corrected when discovered, may be addressed by simply not relying on the material.24 Serious responses, such as striking material, costs, dismissal, or regulatory referral, are reserved for deliberate conduct: defending invented authorities, fabricating evidence, or lying about AI use.
Copy this into the first paragraph of your document. Fill in the blanks. Delete whichever option does not apply.
DECLARATION REGARDING THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Artificial intelligence was used to generate content in this document:
☐ throughout the document ☐ at paragraphs ______ to ______
I confirm that: (1) I have read all of the content that AI generated; (2) I have checked that every case, statute, regulation and quotation in this document is real and says what I have said it says; and (3) I did not use AI to create or alter any evidence.
Name: ____________________ ☐ Party ☐ Lawyer ☐ Representative ☐ Self-represented litigant
Date: ____________ Signature: ____________________
AI tools invent court cases. Here is how to catch them in about two minutes.
1. Go to CanLII. Open www.canlii.org. It is free. You do not need an account.
2. Search the case name. Type the party names into the search box.
3. If nothing comes up, the case might be fake. Do not assume you searched wrong. Try once more with the citation (the string of numbers and letters). If that also finds nothing, take it out of the document.
4. If it does come up, open it and read it. AI often takes a real case and tells you it decided something it did not decide. If you cannot find that idea anywhere in the decision, the AI made it up, even though the case is real.
5. Check any quotation. Use Ctrl+F (or Command+F) and search for a few of the quoted words inside the decision. If the words are not there, the quotation is invented. Take it out.
6. Copy the link. Put the CanLII web address in your document next to the case name, with the paragraph number you rely on.
7. A trap to avoid: some websites show AI-written summaries of cases. Do not rely on the summary. Read the decision.
Prepared by Courtready.ca. Offered freely for adoption, adaptation, or criticism.