Ireland: the High Court wrote the verification duty down

The instruments

• 29 Jul 2026Practice Direction HC 142, issued by the President of the High Court, Mr Justice David Barniville. In operation 1 September 2026, applying to proceedings begun before or after that date and to court documents prepared after it. The full page carries it paragraph by paragraph.
• Non-lawyersThe direction points litigants in person to a separate Guidance for Non-Lawyers on the Courts Service website. Listed, not read at source.
• SanctionsNo Irish sanction matter is on the record yet. The direction was written before one was needed.

Why Ireland matters

HC 142 is the clearest statement from any court in these islands that the check on AI work must be human and must be independent of the AI. It does not ban the tools. It makes the person who signs the document answerable for having verified what the tools produced, and it prices the failure in costs, in the filing itself, and in the practitioner’s standing.

Two days after it came into operation, India’s Supreme Court set aside a customs penalty in Gadiya v. Union of India because the order relied on AI-produced authorities. Five weeks before, the Illinois Appellate Court in Scott had set $1,500 per false citation. Ireland states the duty. India and Illinois state the price. None of them says how anyone would show, on the day it matters, that the check took place.

Ireland was not first with its formula. The Caribbean Court of Justice barred GenAI from “altering, embellishing, strengthening, diluting or otherwise rephrasing” a witness’s evidence on 14 February 2025, seventeen months earlier, in almost the same words.

Paragraph 10 of HC 142 names legal privilege among the known risks, and paragraph 32 reaches discovery material under court order or undertaking. Both sit on the privilege page.

Sources

• Courts Service of Ireland, Practice Direction HC 142, full text
• Courts Service of Ireland, practice directions register

Related

• AI rules for lawyers, country by country · England and Wales
• Practice Direction HC 142, paragraph by paragraph
• Verification is becoming a duty. Evidence of verification is the missing layer.
• The Caribbean, the same formula, seventeen months earlier
• Privilege and AI

Checked 7 September 2026. HC 142 read in full at source. Information, not legal advice.

Common questions

Does Ireland have rules on AI in court documents?

Yes. High Court Practice Direction HC 142 on the Responsible Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Court Documents was issued on 29 July 2026 by the President of the High Court and came into operation on 1 September 2026. It applies to pleadings, submissions, affidavits, witness statements and expert reports in civil proceedings.

What does HC 142 require?

Independent human verification of GenAI-assisted material before use. The direction says in terms that checking with the same or another AI does not count. Affidavits, witness statements and expert reports carry declarations about GenAI use, and parties must disclose GenAI use when the Court directs it.

What does non-compliance with HC 142 cost?

Adverse costs orders including personal costs orders against practitioners, rejection of the document, striking out of a claim or defence, and referral of a practitioner to the Legal Services Regulatory Authority or their professional body.