DIFC Courts Tighten AI Rules as Use of Generative Tools Grows in Litigation

The Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) Courts have begun operationalising their landmark framework on the use of artificial intelligence in legal proceedings, as digital hearings and AI-driven tools become increasingly embedded in the UAE’s judicial ecosystem.

The Practical Guidance Note on the use of large language models and generative content, introduced in late 2023, is now being actively applied in cases before the DIFC Courts. The framework requires litigants and lawyers to disclose whenever AI-generated material is used in filings, pleadings, or evidence — and to verify the accuracy and reliability of such content before submission.

Officials say the move is part of a broader strategy to safeguard procedural integrity while encouraging responsible innovation. The DIFC Courts, which handle some of the most complex commercial disputes in the region, now conduct more than 90 per cent of hearings remotely — underscoring how digital transformation has reshaped modern litigation in Dubai.

The guidelines make it clear that accountability remains human. Even when generative tools are used for drafting, research or translation, lawyers remain responsible for the veracity and appropriateness of all submitted material. The note also warns against potential breaches of confidentiality when using publicly available AI models that may store or reuse input data.

Legal commentators have described the DIFC initiative as one of the first comprehensive AI governance models within a judicial system globally — and the most detailed yet in the Middle East. By focusing on disclosure and traceability rather than prohibition, the Courts have chosen a path that integrates technological progress with ethical and professional oversight.

Sunil Ambalavelil, Chairman of Kaden Borris, said the new framework marks a defining shift for the legal profession. “The DIFC Courts have shown remarkable foresight in crafting guidelines that encourage innovation without eroding accountability,” he said. “Artificial intelligence can help improve access to justice, but it cannot replace human judgment. Lawyers must understand that when AI assists them, they remain answerable for its outputs.”

He added that compliance will soon become part of daily legal practice. “Firms should now institutionalise AI governance — from disclosure registers to internal verification processes. This isn’t just about avoiding sanctions; it’s about preserving the trustworthiness of submissions to the court,” Ambalavelil said.

The introduction of AI-use disclosure rules comes as part of the DIFC Courts’ broader digital transformation agenda. Over the past two years, the Courts have launched blockchain-based verification systems, e-notarisation platforms, and online dispute resolution portals, all designed to streamline access and improve procedural efficiency. The AI guidance now completes that ecosystem by addressing the legal and ethical dimensions of digital practice.

Industry experts say the next challenge lies in interpretation and enforcement. Judges may soon have to determine whether AI-generated content qualifies as admissible evidence, whether metadata and prompts must be disclosed, and how privilege applies when third-party AI platforms process sensitive information.

Ambalavelil believes the DIFC framework sets a measured precedent. “We cannot wait for perfect global standards before acting,” he said. “The Courts have taken a realistic step — prioritising disclosure and human oversight. Over time, further refinements will be needed, especially around vendor transparency and data retention policies, but the foundation has been correctly laid.”

Dubai’s approach is consistent with the UAE’s national digital and AI strategies, which aim to make the country a global leader in responsible technology adoption. The DIFC Courts’ move also positions Dubai at the forefront of judicial innovation, offering a governance model that other regional and international courts may look to emulate.

For practitioners, the shift signals the beginning of a new era in legal technology management. Generative AI is no longer an experimental tool but a declared presence in the courtroom. Lawyers are expected to verify, document and disclose its use with the same rigour applied to any other form of expert evidence.

As the Courts fast-track implementation, the guidelines are gaining real traction within the legal community. They provide not only a compliance framework but also an ethical compass for how artificial intelligence should coexist with human decision-making in the justice system.

“The DIFC initiative demonstrates that innovation and integrity can advance together,” Ambalavelil said. “By insisting on transparency, the Courts have ensured that AI serves the law — not the other way around.”

With digital hearings now the norm and AI tools increasingly integrated into advocacy, Dubai’s judiciary has moved decisively to ensure that the benefits of technology do not come at the expense of accountability. The DIFC Courts’ governance framework, once a policy document, is now shaping how justice is administered in one of the world’s most advanced legal systems.

Global Scenario

Courts in several jurisdictions are taking similar steps to address the growing influence of generative AI in litigation. In Singapore, the judiciary has issued ethics advisories on AI-assisted drafting, while courts in the United Kingdom and the United States have introduced disclosure obligations for lawyers using AI in submissions. The DIFC’s approach, however, stands out for its comprehensive scope — combining mandatory transparency with practical compliance mechanisms — and is likely to serve as a reference point for other Gulf and international courts exploring the regulation of AI in judicial practice.

For any enquiries please fill out this form, or contact info@thelawreporters.com and follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.