Law360 Canada (June 5, 2026, 4:16 PM EDT) -- Yukon’s Supreme Court has issued a directive on the use of generative AI “in written and oral representations” in a bid to reinforce the “integrity and credibility of legal proceedings.”

The directive, issued June 2, notes that while generative AI “is a tool that may facilitate some of the work of counsel and litigants,” it can make mistakes — the hallucinating of case law, for example. (Hallucination in this context means AI content turning out to be wrong or misleading.)

“This practice direction aims to preserve and reinforce the integrity and credibility of legal proceedings by addressing the use of generative AI in written and oral representations to the Supreme Court of Yukon,” states the directive, signed by Supreme Court of Yukon Chief Justice Suzanne Duncan.

Right off the top, the court warns lawyers and litigants to use caution when “relying on and referencing legal authorities, analysis or principles derived from generative AI in their written and oral representations.”

For this reason, the court will now require counsel or the litigant to sign a certificate assuring that information being presented is accurate.

“All pleadings, notices of application, responses and outlines shall include a certificate … signed by counsel or the litigant, certifying that the person signing is satisfied as to the authenticity of every authority and legal principle cited in the document,” states the directive, which includes an example of the certificate.

Counsel and litigants are also being cautioned to rely only on “authoritative sources” such as official court websites, government websites, commonly referenced commercial publishers or “well-known public services” when referencing case law, legislation, legal commentary or principles in written and oral representations.

The directive also urges them to “keep a human in the loop,” that lawyers and litigants are responsible for the accuracy of their submissions.

“Anyone who uses generative AI in the preparation of their representations must check and confirm the accuracy of the information provided. Verification can be done through cross-referencing with reliable legal databases.”

Failure to abide by the directive could result “in the assessment of costs, including personal costs, against them,” warns the court.

Finally, it acknowledges generative AI “is constantly evolving” and that “[n]ew opportunities and challenges” with the fast-moving technology will continue to emerge.

With this, the court is encouraging “discussion and collaboration with stakeholders to respond to changes in the use of generative AI in ways that ensure the integrity of legal proceedings and safeguard public confidence in the justice system.”

Comment from the Supreme and Territorial Courts of Yukon was not immediately available.

The issuing of this directive comes as courts across Canada continue to grapple with the use of AI by parties participating in cases.

In May 2025, a lawyer in a divorce case in Ontario’s Superior Court was admonished by the judge for filing a factum containing fake, AI-generated case citations. Around that same time, a judge with that province’s Court of Justice reportedly delivered a similar scolding to a lawyer in a criminal case. And in early 2024, a B.C. judge called out a lawyer for filing non-existent citations. In that case, the lawyer was ordered to pay costs to the other side for the time it took to discover the citations were fake.

If you have any information, story ideas or news tips for Law 360 Canada, please contact Terry Davidson at t.davidson@lexisnexis.ca or 905-415-5899.