Many courts and arbitral institutions are issuing guidelines on the use of generative AI. We compiled a list of them so you don’t have to.
Email me with additions, corrections, or just to let me know if you found this useful: rory@eperoto.com.
| Country | Institution Type | Institution | Document Title | Description | URL | Date | Scope |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| _International | Arbitral institution | CIArb (Chartered Institute of Arbitrators) | Guideline on the Use of AI in Arbitration (2025) | Soft-law guidance incl. disclosure, confidentiality, and suggested procedural approaches. | https://www.ciarb.org/media/m5dl3pha/ciarb-guideline-on-the-use-of-ai-in-arbitration-2025-_final_march-2025.pdf | 3/1/2025 | Arbitration |
| _International | Arbitral institution | AAA-ICDR (International Center for Dispute Resolution) | Guidance on Arbitrators’ Use of AI Tools | Practical do’s/don’ts mapped to due process and ethics canons for arbitrators. | https://go.adr.org/rs/294-SFS-516/images/2025_AAA-ICDR%20Guidance%20on%20Arbitrators%20Use%20of%20AI%20Tools%20%282%29.pdf | 3/1/2025 | Arbitration |
| _International | ADR provider | JAMS | Artificial Intelligence Disputes Clause & Rules | Rules/clauses for AI-related disputes; arbitration and mediation options. | https://www.jamsadr.com/files/uploads/documents/jams-ai-rules.pdf | 6/14/2024 | ADR (AI disputes) |
| _International | Professional/Bar | International Bar Association (Mediation Committee) | Guidelines on the Use of Generative AI in Mediation | Guidance for mediations, including sample disclosure statement and risk controls. | https://www.ibanet.org/Guidelines-on-the-use-of-generative-artificial-intelligence-in-mediation | 6/19/2025 | Mediation |
| _International | Arbitral/ADR | SVAMC | Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Arbitration (1st ed.) | Best-practice framework incl. non-delegation, disclosure, and model clause. | https://svamc.org/wp-content/uploads/SVAMC-AI-Guidelines-First-Edition.pdf | 4/30/2024 | Arbitration |
| _International | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | ICC (International Chamber of Commerce) | - | Task force active; practical guidance expected but not yet published. | https://iccwbo.org/dispute-resolution/thought-leadership/commission-on-arbitration-and-adr/ | Arbitration/ADR | |
| _International | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | LCIA | - | No AI-use guideline publicly available as of 2025-10-10. | https://www.lcia.org/ | Arbitration | |
| _International | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | SIAC | - | No AI-use guideline publicly available as of 2025-10-10. | https://www.siac.org.sg/ | Arbitration | |
| _International | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | HKIAC | - | No AI-use guideline publicly available as of 2025-10-10. | https://www.hkiac.org/ | Arbitration | |
| _International | Arbitral/ADR (watch-list) | WIPO Arbitration & Mediation Center | - (resources on AI-related disputes; no usage guideline) | Provides model clauses/resources for AI-related disputes; no conduct guideline for AI use in proceedings. | https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/center/specific-sectors/artificial-intelligence/ | ADR (AI disputes) | |
| _International | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) | - | No AI-use guideline publicly available as of 2025-10-11. | https://pca-cpa.org/ | Arbitration | |
| Australia | Court | Supreme Court of Victoria (Australia) | Guidelines for Litigants: Responsible Use of AI in Litigation | Guidelines requiring appropriate disclosure and candour on AI use. | https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2024-05/AI%20Guidelines%20SCV.pdf | 5/6/2024 | Litigation |
| Australia | Court | Supreme Court of New South Wales (Australia) | Practice Note SC Gen 23 – Use of Generative AI | Statewide practice note governing GenAI use by practitioners and litigants. | https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdf | 2/3/2025 | Litigation |
| Australia | Court | NSW Land & Environment Court (Australia) | Practice Note – Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (Updated) | Practice note mirroring NSW Supreme Court approach for LEC proceedings. | https://lec.nsw.gov.au/content/dam/dcj/ctsd/lec/documents/practice-notes/Practice_Note_-_Use_of_Generative_Artificial_Intelligence_UPDATED.pdf | 2/12/2025 | Litigation |
| Austria | Arbitral institution | VIAC (Vienna International Arbitral Centre) | Note on the Use of AI in Arbitration Proceedings (2025) | Practical note for tribunals and parties to enhance efficiency while safeguarding integrity. | https://www.viac.eu/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/VIAC-Note-on-AI-1.pdf | 4/1/2025 | Arbitration |
| Brazil | Arbitral institution | CAM-CCBC (Center for Arbitration and Mediation of the Brazil-Canada Chamber of Commerce) | Administrative Guidance No. 07/2025 (Use of AI in Administered Proceedings) | Institutional guidance addressing participants’ responsibilities and confidentiality when using AI; clarifies CAM-CCBC’s own use; applies to arbitration, mediation and dispute boards. | https://www.ccbc.org.br/cam-ccbc-centro-arbitragem-mediacao/en/administrative-guidance-no-07-2025/ | 7/17/2025 | Arbitration/Mediation |
| Canada | Court | Federal Court of Canada | Artificial Intelligence (policy page) | Principles and notices on AI use in the Federal Court. | https://www.fct-cf.ca/en/pages/law-and-practice/artificial-intelligence | 12/20/2023 | Litigation |
| Canada | Tribunal system | Tribunals Ontario (Canada) | Practice Direction on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Tribunal Proceedings | Practice direction for parties on AI use and disclosure in tribunal proceedings. | https://tribunalsontario.ca/documents/TO/Practice-Direction-on-AI_EN.html | 4/1/2025 | Administrative tribunals |
| China | Arbitral institution | CIETAC (China) | Provisional Guidelines on the Use of AI Technology in Arbitration | APAC institutional guideline addressing AI use by parties and tribunals. | https://www.cietac.org/index.php?m=Page&a=index&id=384&l=en | 7/18/2025 | Arbitration |
| New Zealand | Court | New Zealand Courts (all benches) | Guidelines for Use of Generative AI in Courts and Tribunals | Bench-wide guidance for lawyers and court users. | https://www.courtsofnz.govt.nz/assets/6-Going-to-Court/practice-directions/practice-guidelines/all-benches/20231207-GenAI-Guidelines-Judicial.pdf | 12/7/2023 | Litigation |
| Singapore | Court | Singapore Supreme Court | Registrar’s Circular No. 1 of 2024 – Guide on the Use of Generative AI by Court Users | Court-user guide applicable across Supreme, State, and Family Courts. | https://www.judiciary.gov.sg/docs/default-source/circulars/2024/registrar%27s_circular_no_1_2024_supreme_court.pdf | 10/1/2024 | Litigation |
| Spain | Ministry of Justice policy for AI use in the justice administration (nationwide). | https://www.mjusticia.gob.es/es/JusticiaEspana/ProyectosTransformacionJusticia/Documents/Spains_Policy_on_the_use_of_AI_in_the_Justice_Administration.pdf | 2024 | Litigation | |||
| Sweden | Arbitral institution | SCC Arbitration Institute | Guide to the Use of AI in Cases Administered under the SCC Rules | Board-adopted guide for SCC-administered cases; flexible and case-focused. | https://sccarbitrationinstitute.se/wp-content/uploads/2024/12/scc_guide_to_the_use_of_artificial_intelligence_in_cases_administered_under_the_scc_rules-1.pdf | 10/16/2024 | Arbitration |
| Sweden | Professional/Bar | Advokatsamfundet (Swedish Bar Association) | Allmänna råd rörande användning av generativa AI-modeller i advokatverksamhet | Guidance from the Swedish Bar Association (Allmänna råd, 13 June 2024) on advocates’ use of generative AI in practice. Emphasises confidentiality and GDPR compliance, non-delegation of legal judgment, rigorous verification of outputs, and appropriate client communication. Urges firm-level policies, supervision, and vendor due-diligence (terms, security, retention) before using AI tools. | https://www.advokatsamfundet.se/globalassets/advokatsamfundet_sv/advokatyrket/allmanna-rad-rorande-anvandning-av-generativa-ai-modeller-i-advokatverksamhet.pdf | 6/18/2024 | |
| Switzerland | Arbitral institution (watch-list) | Swiss Arbitration Centre (formerly SCAI) | — | No AI-use guideline publicly available as of 2025-10-11. | https://www.swissarbitration.org/ | Arbitration | |
| United Arab Emirates | Court | DIFC Courts (Dubai) | Practical Guidance Note No. 2 of 2023 – Guidelines on the Use of LLMs & GenAI | Party-facing guidance for the use of LLMs/GenAI in DIFC proceedings. | https://www.difccourts.ae/rules-decisions/practice-directions/practical-guidance-note-no-2-2023-guidelines-use-large-language-models-and-generative-ai-proceedings-difc-courts | 12/21/2023 | Litigation |
| United Kingdom | Court/Judiciary | Courts & Tribunals Judiciary (England & Wales) | Artificial Intelligence (AI): Guidance for Judicial Office Holders (Refreshed) | Updated judicial guidance (replacing 2023 note) with examples and cautions. | https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/04/Refreshed-AI-Guidance-published-version.pdf | 4/15/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court (state) | Illinois Supreme Court | Policy on Artificial Intelligence (Courts) | Statewide policy permitting regulated AI use; effective 2025-01-01. | https://ilcourtsaudio.blob.core.windows.net/antilles-resources/resources/e43964ab-8874-4b7a-be4e-63af019cb6f7/Illinois%20Supreme%20Court%20AI%20Policy.pdf | 1/1/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court (state) | Delaware Judiciary | Interim Policy on the Use of Generative AI by Judicial Officers & Staff | Training, non-delegation, confidentiality, and approval requirements. | https://courts.delaware.gov/forms/download.aspx?id=266848 | 10/22/2024 | Litigation |
| United States | Court system (state) | Judicial Council of California | Rule 10.430 and Standard 10.80: Generative AI use policies | Requires every California court that allows GenAI to adopt a policy; effective 2025-09-01. | https://courts.ca.gov/cms/rules/index/ten/rule10_430 | 7/18/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina | Standing Order - In Re: Use of Artificial Intelligence | District-wide order requiring AI-use certification; limits certain AI tools except those embedded in standard legal databases. | https://www.ncwd.uscourts.gov/ECFDocs/StandingOrder_ArtificialIntelligence.pdf | 6/18/2024 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Judge Michael M. Baylson) | Standing Order Re: Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Cases Assigned to Judge Baylson | Requires disclosure of any AI use in filings and certification that all citations are verified. | https://www.paed.uscourts.gov/sites/paed/files/documents/procedures/Standing%20Order%20Re%20Artificial%20Intelligence%206.6.pdf | 6/6/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Judge Gene E.K. Pratter) | Standing Order Regarding Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence in Cases Assigned to Judge Pratter | Requires disclosure of any generative AI use in drafting and verification of accuracy. | https://www.paed.uscourts.gov/sites/paed/files/documents/procedures/praso1_0.pdf | 5/3/2024 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas (Judge Brantley Starr) | Mandatory Certification Regarding Generative Artificial Intelligence | Certification that no filing text was drafted by generative AI, or that any AI-drafted text was checked against reliable sources. | https://www.texenrls.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/A-sampling-of-AI-Court-Orders.pdf | 5/30/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Judge Arun Subramanian) | Individual Practices in Civil Cases - Section 8(F) Use of ChatGPT and Other Tools | Permits generative AI use but places responsibility on counsel to ensure accuracy and completeness of filings. | https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/practice_documents/AS%20Subramanian%20Civil%20Individual%20Practices_0.pdf | 3/14/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Magistrate Judge Gabriel A. Fuentes) | Standing Order for Civil Cases (generative AI disclosure requirement) | Requires disclosure of any generative AI used for research or drafting and description of tool and manner of use. | https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_judges/Fuentes/Standing%20Order%20For%20Civil%20Cases%20Before%20Judge%20Fuentes%20rev%27d%205-31-23%20%28002%29.pdf | 5/31/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Cole) | Standing Order on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Documents Filed with the Court | Requires disclosure of AI use in preparing filings; reiterates Rule 11 obligations to verify authorities. | https://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/_assets/_documents/_forms/_judges/Cole/Artificial%20Intelligence%20standing%20order.pdf | 2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. Court of International Trade (Judge Stephen A. Vaden) | Order on Artificial Intelligence | Requires disclosure of AI-drafted portions and certification that no confidential/BPI information was exposed. | https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/Order%20on%20Artificial%20Intelligence.pdf | 6/8/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. Court of International Trade (Judge Jane A. Restani) | Order on Artificial Intelligence | Requires disclosure of AI-drafted text and certification regarding protection of confidential/BPI information. | https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/JAR_Order_on_Artificial_Intelligence.pdf | 7/24/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Judge Christopher A. Boyko) | Standing Order on the Use of Generative AI | Warns against AI-drafted filings; allows standard legal databases and search engines; sanctions possible for violations. | https://www.ohnd.uscourts.gov/sites/ohnd/files/Boyko.StandingOrder.GenerativeAI.pdf | Litigation | |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey (Judge Evelyn Padin) | General Pretrial and Trial Procedures - Use of Generative AI (Section B) | Requires disclosure/certification identifying tool used, portions drafted by AI, and human verification of accuracy. | https://www.njd.uscourts.gov/sites/njd/files/EPProcedures.pdf | 7/8/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina | Standing Order - In Re: Use of Artificial Intelligence | Court-wide standing order requiring AI-use certification; restricts AI tools except those embedded in standard legal research platforms. | https://www.ncwd.uscourts.gov/ECFDocs/StandingOrder_ArtificialIntelligence.pdf | 6/18/2024 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of Georgia (civil standing order) | Civil Standing Order - Disclosure of Use of Artificial Intelligence | Requires counsel and pro se parties to disclose any AI used to prepare filings and certify independent verification under Rule 11. | https://www.gand.uscourts.gov/sites/gand/files/TRJ_CVStandingOrder.pdf | Litigation | |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Judge Rita F. Lin) | Standing Order for Civil Cases (AI responsibilities) | Reminds that counsel alone is responsible for accuracy; cautions on AI research tools; no blanket ban or disclosure mandate. | https://cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/judges/lin-rfl/2024-09-18-Civil-Standing-Order.pdf | 9/18/2024 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Judge Araceli Martínez-Olguín) | Standing Order for Civil Cases (AI certification & prompt retention) | Requires certification by lead trial counsel verifying any AI-generated content; directs counsel to retain prompts; sanctions for noncompliance. | https://www.cand.uscourts.gov/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/AMO-Civil-Standing-Order-11.22.2023-FINAL.pdf | 11/22/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Northern District of California (Magistrate Judge Peter H. Kang) | Civil Standing Order (AI disclosure & competence) | Requires disclosure when a paper was created or drafted with any AI tool and confirms counsel’s competence and verification obligations. | https://cand.uscourts.gov/judges/peter-h-kang-phk/ | 7/16/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York (Judge Arun Subramanian) | Individual Practices in Civil Cases - Section 8(F) Use of ChatGPT and Other Tools | Permits AI use but places full responsibility on counsel to ensure accuracy and completeness of filings. | https://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/practice_documents/AS%20Subramanian%20Civil%20Individual%20Practices_0.pdf | 3/14/2025 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. Court of International Trade (Judge Stephen A. Vaden) | Order on Artificial Intelligence | Requires disclosure of AI-drafted portions; warns about risks to confidential/BPI information; sets certification expectations. | https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/Order%20on%20Artificial%20Intelligence.pdf | 6/8/2023 | Litigation |
| United States | Court | U.S. Court of International Trade (Judge Jane A. Restani) | Order on Artificial Intelligence | Requires disclosure of AI-drafted text and certification that no confidential/BPI information was exposed; referenced in 2025 court correspondence. | https://www.cit.uscourts.gov/sites/cit/files/JAR_Order_on_Artificial_Intelligence.pdf | Litigation | |
| United States | Court system (state) | New York State Unified Court System | Interim Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence | Statewide interim policy for judges, justices and nonjudicial staff; limits AI to approved tools, bans uploading confidential materials to public AI, mandates training and human review. | https://www.nycourts.gov/LegacyPDFS/a.i.-policy.pdf | 10/10/2025 | Litigation |
| United Kingdom | Professional/Bar | Bar Council (England & Wales) | Considerations when using generative AI (Guidance for the Bar) | Profession-facing guidance for barristers on safe and ethical use of generative AI: confidentiality/privilege, verification of outputs, non-delegation of legal judgment. | https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/resource/new-guidance-on-generative-ai-for-the-bar.html | 1/30/2024 | Professional |
| United Kingdom | Professional/Bar | Law Society of England & Wales | Generative AI – the essentials (Guidance hub for solicitors) | Primer and ongoing guidance for solicitors and firms on using generative AI safely: risk, competence, confidentiality, client care; links to further resources and policy updates. | https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/topics/ai-and-lawtech/generative-ai-the-essentials | 10/1/2024 | Professional |
| United Kingdom | Regulator | Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA) | Risk Outlook: The use of artificial intelligence in the legal market | Regulatory analysis of AI use in legal services with expectations for firms on risk management, transparency, supervision and consumer protection. | https://www.sra.org.uk/sra/research-publications/artificial-intelligence-legal-market/ | 11/20/2023 | Professional |
| United Kingdom | Regulator/Research | Bar Standards Board (BSB) | Technology and Innovation at the Bar (Research report) | Research baseline on technology and AI adoption at the Bar to inform future regulation; not prescriptive guidance but influential. | https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/static/370d1003-9533-4316-87ba75f68a41c357/Tech-at-the-Bar-2025.pdf | 4/28/2025 | Professional |
About Eperoto
Eperoto is a tool for dispute lawyers to perform better dispute risk assessments, visually and quantitatively.
Used by firms globally from AmLaw 100 to litigation boutiques as well as litigation finance, insurance and mediators. We help lawyers resolve disputes, faster.