AI Hallucinations in Legal Practice: Risks for Malaysian & SEA Lawyers
Why Litigation Tech Is the Game-Changer?
The Current State of Litigation Tech in 2025
Recent Legal Developments Impacting Litigation Tech
Why Litigation Tech Matters: Key Benefits for Legal Professionals
Introducing NexLaw AI: Your Ultimate Litigation Tech Partner
Take Action: Experience NexLaw AI Today
AI Hallucinations in Legal Practice: Risks for Malaysian & SEA Lawyers
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is transforming many industries, including the legal sector in Malaysia and Southeast Asia. However, the use of general-purpose AI tools like ChatGPT in legal workflows has led to a growing problem: AI hallucinations. These hallucinations refer to AI-generated content that appears plausible but is factually incorrect or entirely fabricated. In the legal context, such errors can have severe consequences, including court sanctions and damage to professional reputations.
The Rise of AI Hallucinations in Legal Practice
Since 2023, there have been over 150 documented court cases worldwide where lawyers relied on AI-generated materials that contained hallucinations fabricated legal citations, nonexistent case law or incorrect facts. Many of these cases involved lawyers submitting briefs or court documents with AI-generated errors that went undetected until they were challenged in court. In some instances, courts have imposed monetary sanctions and disciplinary actions against the lawyers involved.
A notable example is the 2023 Mata vs. Avianca case in New York, where two lawyers were fined US$5,000 for submitting a brief largely produced by ChatGPT, which cited at least nine fictitious court decisions. This case was widely publicized and serves as a cautionary tale for legal professionals globally.
In Malaysia and Southeast Asia, while the number of reported cases is still emerging, the risk is equally significant. Courts in the region are beginning to encounter AI hallucinations in submissions, raising concerns about the reliability of AI-generated legal research and documents.
Why Is General Purpose AI Unsuitable for Litigation Workflows?
General-purpose AI models like ChatGPT or Perplexity are trained on vast datasets and designed to generate human-like text across many domains. However, they lack the specialized legal knowledge and rigorous fact-checking mechanisms required for litigation and legal research. Key reasons why these AI tools are ill-suited for legal workflows include:
- Fabrication of Legal Citations: AI often “hallucinates” by inventing case names, statutes or legal precedents that do not exist, which can mislead lawyers and judges.
- Lack of Verification: AI outputs are generated probabilistically without real-time access to authoritative legal databases or court records, leading to unverifiable or inaccurate information.
- High Stakes of Legal Work: Unlike general content creation, legal documents require absolute accuracy, as errors can affect case outcomes and lead to sanctions under professional conduct rules.
- Regulatory Scrutiny: Courts in multiple jurisdictions have issued orders requiring lawyers to disclose AI use and certify the accuracy of all citations and facts in filings, reflecting growing judicial intolerance for AI errors.
Get ahead of the curve with our free Guide to Starting Using Legal AI!
Over 150 Court Cases Highlight the Growing Problem
A comprehensive roster compiled by legal data expert Damien Charlotin lists 99 cases globally involving AI hallucinations in court filings, with many more likely unreported. Approximately 30 of these cases involved lawyers who submitted AI-generated documents containing fabricated legal references, even after the risks of AI hallucinations became widely known.
In Malaysia and Southeast Asia, the legal community must take heed of this trend. The increasing use of AI in legal practice without proper safeguards threatens to undermine the integrity of legal proceedings and expose lawyers to reputational and financial risks.
What’s the Legal and Ethical Implications for Legal Landscapes?
The submission of AI-generated documents with hallucinations can violate professional rules such as Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (in the US context), which mandates truthfulness in legal filings. Similar ethical standards apply in Malaysia and Southeast Asia, where lawyers are responsible for verifying the accuracy of their submissions.
Failure to do so can result in:
- Court Sanctions: Monetary fines or penalties imposed by judges for submitting false or misleading documents.
- Disciplinary Actions: Professional misconduct investigations by bar associations or legal councils.
- Damage to Client Interests: Erroneous legal arguments can weaken cases and harm clients’ positions.
- Loss of Credibility: Repeated AI errors can erode trust in lawyers’ competence and diligence.
Why Southeast Asian Law Firms Must Be Cautious?
The rapid adoption of AI tools in Malaysia and Southeast Asia’s legal sector is promising but fraught with risks. General-purpose AI is not designed to handle the complexities of litigation workflows or the precision required in legal research. Law firms must:
- Avoid over-reliance on AI-generated content without thorough human verification.
- Implement strict review protocols to check all citations and facts.
- Stay informed about evolving judicial attitudes toward AI use in legal practice.
- Educate lawyers and staff on the limitations and risks of AI tools.
See NexLaw in Action
Start your free trial and kick off your legal AI journey with a personalized demo
*By submitting the form, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy
NexLaw: Best AI for Lawyers
Unlike general AI models, NexLaw AI is purpose-built for the legal industry in Malaysia and Southeast Asia. It addresses the key issues of AI hallucinations by integrating:
- Verified Legal Databases: Access to authentic, up-to-date case law and statutes specific to the region.
- Citation Integrity: Automated cross-checking of legal references to prevent fabricated or inaccurate citations.
- Litigation Workflow Integration: Tools designed to support drafting, research, and case preparation with accuracy and compliance.
- Compliance with Local Regulations: Features that help law firms adhere to professional conduct rules and court requirements.
By adopting NexLaw AI, law firms can leverage the benefits of AI efficiency, speed and insight; while minimizing the risks of hallucinations and legal errors.
Interested In Features Like This?
Receive complimentary access to our resources and a personalized live demo tailored to your needs.
Conclusion
AI hallucinations in legal documents have already led to over 150 court cases worldwide, with many involving lawyers who failed to verify AI-generated content. In Malaysia and Southeast Asia, the legal profession must be vigilant. General-purpose AI tools like ChatGPT are not equipped to handle the intricacies of litigation or legal research and pose significant risks if used improperly.
Law firms and lawyers should adopt specialized legal AI solutions like NexLaw AI, which are designed to ensure accuracy, maintain citation integrity and comply with ethical standards. This approach safeguards legal professionals from potential sanctions and protects the interests of their clients in an increasingly AI-driven legal landscape.
Take action today: Book a demo call here or subscribe to our platform to safeguard your legal practice from AI hallucinations and elevate your litigation capabilities.