Authored By: Mandisa Mthembu
University of KwaZulu Natal
Abstract
This article examines how Artificial Intelligence (AI) has made significant inroads into legal research, contract analysis, and how it is increasingly reshaping legal systems across the world, influencing how evidence is assessed, cases are predicted, and judgments are supported. Tools like Legal Genius promise to streamline legal work, reduce human error, and increase efficiency. However, the rapid adoption of AI in legal practice has outpaced the development of ethical guidelines and professional standards. AI systems, while capable of processing vast amounts of data, are inherently limited by their design and training datasets. The phenomenon known as ‘AI hallucination’, where the system generates credible but false information, poses a distinct risk to legal integrity.
Introduction
Artificial Intelligence (AI) has emerged as a transformative tool in the legal profession streamlining case management, enhancing research, and even predicting outcomes. Yet, its adoption in legal proceedings raises critical ethical and constitutional questions. Can algorithms interpret justice fairly? Should AI have a say in sentencing or evidence evaluation? These questions form the crux of an ongoing debate about technology’s place within the rule of law. This article explores why ethical frameworks are necessary to ensure that AI complements, rather than compromises, justice.
The Rise of AI in Legal Practice
In an era where artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, the legal profession faces unprecedented challenges. The 2025 South African case of Northbound Processing v SA Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator serves as a cautionary tale of the potential pitfalls when AI is integrated into legal practice without rigorous oversight. During the proceedings, lawyers relied on an AI tool known as Legal Genius, which generated fictitious case citations and cases that did not exist. The court, upon discovering these inaccuracies, referred the matter to the Legal Practice Council, highlighting the profound consequences of relying on unverified AI-generated information. This incident underscores the urgent need for clear ethical frameworks to guide AI use in legal work.
Case: Northbound Processing v SA Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator
The Northbound Processing case involved an urgent application by the company to compel the release of a refining license from the South African Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator. During the proceedings, the lawyers presented arguments citing cases and precedents generated by Legal Genius. Upon scrutiny, the court discovered that many of these citations were entirely fictitious. Acting Judge DJ Smit criticized the reliance on AI without verification, stating that such practices could undermine public confidence in the justice system. The referral to the Legal Practice Council further emphasizes the gravity of ethical lapses in the use of AI in law.
This incident is more than just a moment of embarrassment for the legal team involved it is a warning to the entire legal community. As AI tools become increasingly embedded in research and drafting, ethical oversight becomes non-negotiable. Artificial intelligence can process vast data quickly, but it lacks moral judgment and professional accountability. The responsibility for accuracy still rests squarely on the shoulders of legal practitioners.
Ethical Implications of AI Use in Law
The case raises critical questions about the ethical responsibilities of legal practitioners in the age of AI. While AI can enhance efficiency, lawyers retain the ultimate responsibility for the accuracy and reliability of information presented to the court. Blind reliance on AI tools compromises professional accountability and risks the administration of justice. There is also a broader societal implication such as if AI-generated errors are left unchecked, they may erode trust in legal institutions, potentially impacting the perceived legitimacy of court decisions and the legal system.
Towards Regulatory and Ethical Frameworks
Given the risks highlighted by the Northbound Processing case, there is a clear and urgent need for regulatory frameworks governing AI use in legal practice. Such frameworks should establish standards for verification of AI-generated information, outline professional accountability, and mandate transparency in the integration of AI tools. Legal councils, professional bodies, and educational institutions must collaborate to ensure that AI adoption enhances rather than undermines legal integrity.
Lessons for Legal Practitioners
The Northbound Processing incident offers valuable lessons for legal practitioners worldwide. First, it demonstrates the importance of human oversight when integrating AI into legal processes. Second, it underscores the necessity of professional scepticism and diligence in verifying AI-generated information. Finally, it highlights the urgent need for ethics training and guidelines tailored to the realities of AI-assisted legal practice.
Broader Implications for AI Governance
Beyond the legal profession, the incident illuminate’s broader issues surrounding AI governance. As AI systems increasingly influence decision-making in finance, healthcare, and public policy, the potential for errors or biased outputs poses a societal risk. Regulatory approaches in law can serve as a model for other sectors, emphasizing accountability, transparency, and ethical responsibility in the deployment of AI technologies.
Recommendations for Safe AI Integration
To mitigate risks, several recommendations emerge. Legal professionals should receive training on AI limitations and verification techniques. Professional bodies should issue clear ethical guidelines for AI use in legal practice. AI developers should implement safeguards to minimize hallucinations, such as cross-checking algorithms and incorporating human review checkpoints. By adopting these measures, the legal community can harness the benefits of AI without compromising integrity or public trust.
Conclusion
The integration of Artificial Intelligence in legal proceedings represents both a revolutionary opportunity and a profound ethical challenge. Without adequate regulation, AI may erode the very principles of justice it aims to serve. Ethical frameworks grounded in transparency, accountability, and human oversight are essential to ensure that technology supports, rather than supplants, the rule of law. The Northbound Processing case serves as a wake-up call for the legal profession and society at large. AI has the potential to revolutionize legal practice, but without proper oversight, it can introduce errors with serious ethical and legal consequences. Establishing robust ethical frameworks, ensuring human verification, and fostering professional accountability are essential steps toward safe and responsible AI integration. By doing so, the legal system can embrace innovation while maintaining the trust and integrity that form the cornerstone of justice.
REFERENCE(S)
Legal Practice Council. (2025). Code of Conduct for Legal Practitioners, Candidate Legal Practitioners and Juristic Entities. Pretoria: LPC.
Smit, D.J. (2025). Judgment in Northbound Processing v SA Diamond and Precious Metals Regulator [Unreported case]. Gauteng Division, High Court of South Africa.
South African Law Reform Commission. (2024). Discussion Paper on Artificial Intelligence and Legal Ethics. Pretoria: SALRC.
University of Pretoria Centre for AI & Data Ethics. (2025). Guidelines for Responsible AI in Legal Practice. Pretoria: UP Press.
Calo, R. Artificial Intelligence Policy: A Primer and Roadmap. UC Davis Law Review, 51(2), pp. 399–435. (2017).
Surden, H. Artificial Intelligence and Law: An Overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35(4), pp. 1305–1345. (2019).
