The Qatar International Court and Dispute Resolution Centre (QICDRC) has issued a procedural directive governing the disciplined use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools, which litigants and their legal representatives are required to comply with when appearing and pleading before the court and the Regulatory Tribunal.
Procedural Directive No 1 of 2026 was issued as part of the court's heightened commitment to ensuring strict oversight of all documents and legal filings submitted to it, regulating the manner of reliance on legal references and sources, and obligating attorneys to conduct comprehensive verification and certification of the accuracy of all such sources prior to submission to the court, particularly when utilising AI-powered technological tools, QICDRC said.
The court added that this measure aims to preserve litigants' confidence in the judicial system and to uphold the principle of procedural legality, which constitutes a cornerstone of justice and a fundamental safeguard of the right to litigation.
QICDRC further indicated that the issuance of this directive followed the judgment rendered by its Court of First Instance in Case No [2025] QIC (E) 3, in which it concluded, in its reasoning, that the legal arguments submitted by counsel for the defendant, which relied on purported judicial precedents later proven to be non-existent and fabricated,did not constitute a mere research lapse or an isolated professional error.
Rather, they reflected conduct that fell short of the duty of candour and transparency owed to the tribunal, and were intended to mislead the court by invoking legal authorities and precedents that had no legal existence.
As such, QICDRC held that such conduct exceeded the bounds of professional negligence and amounted to intentional misconduct, undermining integrity and impeding the proper administration of justice.
This judgment constituted a judicial precedent, the first of its kind in the Middle East and North Africa region, and attracted broad international attention due to the legal issues it raised concerning the use of AI-powered tools in legal practice, QICDRC noted.
It further emphasised that the judgment also reviewed comparative jurisprudence in this field, including leading cases issued in England and Wales, the US, Canada, and Australia.
The court clarified that the increasing reliance on AI-powered tools in legal practice has become a practical reality imposed by the modern workplace, serving as a beneficial orientation as long as AI reduces expenditures and enhances performance.
However, QICDRC noted, this is conditioned on compliance with the requirements of professional integrity, ethical standards, and provisions of the law.
This new directive stipulates the responsibility of attorneys for the accuracy, correctness, and integrity of the submissions they present, imposing upon them the duty to verify all information, ensure the accuracy of legal reasoning, and confirm that nothing submitted to the court contains errors, misrepresentation, or deception, the court highlighted.
It added that the directive also emphasises the protection of confidentiality and privacy, prohibiting the input of any confidential or legally protected data into AI-powered tools accessible to the public, as any breach of this prohibition may expose the violator to legally prescribed disciplinary sanctions.
In addition, the directive clarified that pre‑filing disclosure of the use of AI-powered tools in drafting submissions is not mandatory unless explicitly requested by the court, while emphasising the necessity of adhering to the principle of transparency.
In such cases, the attorney who utilised these tools must disclose which portions of the filing were drafted using AI when requested, and certify the steps taken to review and verify the accuracy of those portions in accordance with applicable professional standards.
Commenting on this, Chief Executive Officer of QICDRC, Faisal bin Rashid al-Sahouti, stressed that this directive underscores the court's commitment to keeping pace with cutting-edge technological advances in the litigation field, and to leveraging AI-powered tools in a legally disciplined manner while observing professional responsibilities to ensure the integrity of judicial proceedings and bolster litigants' confidence in the justice system.
