It is tempting to use generative AI tools like ChatGPT to draft legal emails or review advice. They are fast and articulate. The reality is, using AI to communicate or debate with your lawyer usually has an expensive byproduct: it drives up your legal fees. Because AI tools do not know the difference between actual law and a highly convincing fiction (“AI hallucinations”), the billable time required to untangle errors and explain why an AI-generated response is incorrect will ultimately land on your invoice.

Why do you feel it necessary to consult AI if you have retained a lawyer’s services?

While generative AI tools are evolving, there is a reason you hired a lawyer, and it is important to trust that they have your best interests in mind when building your case.

Bad Lawyering and The Danger of AI “Hallucinations”

Lazy legal professionals have fallen prey to AI hallucinations. Lawyers from different provinces have faced consequences for submitting fake cases to the courts or tribunals:

• In June 2026, the Law Society Tribunal of Ontario ordered a lawyer to pay $31,150 in costs after he filed motions using AI-generated materials containing completely non-existent cases.
• In Ko v. Li, an Ontario lawyer faced contempt proceedings after she initially misled the court about her use of ChatGPT to prepare a factum filled with fake citations.
• In Zhang v. Chen, a British Columbia judge issued a warning about professional accountability after discovering that a lawyer had used fake materials generated by AI. The judge stated, “This case has unfortunately highlighted that generative AI cannot replace the professional expertise required of lawyers in the justice system.”
• In ARIHQ c. Santé Québec, the Quebec Superior Court found that the references and case law cited in the award were either nonexistent or irrelevant due to AI hallucinations. As these references were the only basis for the arbitrator’s legal findings, the Court annulled the arbitrator’s decision.

Technology has not replaced the expertise of human professionals. Competent lawyers do not rely solely on AI-generated responses; they verify them through human judgment. A good lawyer understands that AI is a tool for brainstorming ideas, not an infallible source of truth. If an advanced algorithm can sometimes mislead a professional, it will undoubtedly confuse a client attempting to manage a complicated dispute.

AI May “Invent” Cases or Law

To demonstrate how easily this happens, I recently ran a test with ChatGPT regarding “termination for just cause.” The AI-generated case names and summaries seem flawless, but upon cross-referencing, those cases do not exist:

• Blackwood v. Apex Logistics Inc., 2024 ONCA 412: The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that a single instance of a senior manager using a personal cloud storage drive to back up company files constituted a fundamental breach of the employment contract, justifying dismissal without notice.
• Milner v. Vanguard Manufacturing Ltd., 2025 ONSC 1883: An Ontario Superior Court decision stating that a 15% drop in an employee’s performance metrics over two consecutive quarters, after being placed on a Performance Improvement Plan (PIP), meets the legal threshold for just-cause termination.
• Chao v. Horizon Health Network, 2023 NBCA 89: New Brunswick Court of Appeal ruled that an employee who was unexcused from three consecutive mandatory team meetings could be terminated for cause under the doctrine of “cumulative insubordination.”

Debating Your Lawyer with AI Drives Up Legal Fees

While using AI to understand general concepts is fine, treating it as an authority on your specific situation can do more harm than good.

Lawyers have strict professional obligations to verify the accuracy of the law they rely on. If you send an AI-generated argument or rule to your lawyer, your lawyer will review your email/documents, and the lawyer must spend valuable time researching the AI’s claims, verifying the cited “rules”, and tracking down non-existent “cases”. You ultimately pay for the billable hours your lawyer spends dismantling AI errors and convincing you why the AI’s legal analysis is wrong or inapplicable.

The Choice is yours:  Trust your lawyer or Trust AI.

Employment Law is Context, Not a General Rule

AI operates on patterns and aggregated data. It looks for the most statistically probable words to answer a prompt, not the nuances of your specific situation. This is particularly dangerous in fields like employment law, where outcomes are highly context-dependent. Factors such as your specific industry, the exact wording of a contract clause, and the subtle dynamics of a workplace incident alter which rules apply. A broad, AI-generated legal summary will frequently miss the critical nuance that dictates whether you win or lose a case.

Trust is an important aspect when it comes to working with a lawyer

Ultimately, you need to work with a lawyer you can trust, and there are certain steps to take to achieve that type of relationship. Hiring an employment lawyer can feel a bit daunting, especially if you’re already dealing with a stressful workplace situation like a layoff, discrimination, or a contract dispute.

Here are a few things to consider before selecting the right employment lawyer.

• Your lawyers’ practice should be dedicated to employment law. Employment law changes rapidly, and you want someone immersed in it.
• No case is ever guaranteed, so if they promise you it is, be wary. They should be honest about the risks and present you with a balanced review of your case.
• Ensure you have a primary point of contact committed to a clear timeline for the litigation.
• Choose the firm you trust.

Final Thoughts

AI is a powerful tool for brainstorming, but it is not a lawyer. It lacks accountability and localized expertise. To keep your legal costs down and your case on track, rely on human expertise rather than automated guesswork.