LO
ConstraintCognitive automation2023-12-07
Using generative AI chatbots for legal analysis is not recommended because they generate text by probability, New Zealand's courts told judges and judicial staff
Judge / magistrateoccupation page →
Event date / reported
2023-12-07
Evidence stage
ConstraintFailure, rollback, regulation or cost is suppressing adoption. Can lower an assessment or widen its uncertainty.
Tasks this bears on
Researching the law
Finding and reading the statutes, precedents and authorities a case turns on.
Being augmented✓ Evidence-backed
Where this applies
New Zealand. The judiciary's guidelines for judges, judicial officers, tribunal members and support staff say using GenAI chatbots for legal analysis is not recommended because generative AI produces text based on probability rather than understanding and cannot critically examine legal questions. Guidance with no force of law, from 2023, before the tools of 2025–26.
What this means
A second judiciary, independently, advises judges not to use chatbots for legal analysis.
What it does not yet show
Guidance from 2023; tools and guidance may have moved since.
What you can check
Open the Courts of New Zealand generative AI guidelines for judges and find "not recommended".
Does it change the assessment?
No. The impact index is never moved by a single event. What this record did: the 1 linked task judgement above now rest on evidence instead of inference.
Source
Courts of New Zealand — Guidelines for use of generative artificial intelligence in courts and tribunals: judges, judicial officers, tribunal members and judicial support staff (7 December 2023) · verified 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent) · interpreted 2026-09-30 · Claude (VOLO agent)
Primary source — published by the party that did this, or the authority of record. No co-signature needed.