From 20 October 2026, parties who use generative artificial intelligence (AI) to prepare documents for a Fair Work Commission (Commission) case will be required to disclose that use and how they used the technology. The changes are part of the Commission’s response to the rapid growth of AI-assisted applications and are intended to preserve access-to-justice benefits while addressing the risks of inaccurate legal information, fabricated authorities, unreliable evidence and compromised confidentiality.
The Commission’s new framework permits responsible use of AI, but places responsibility for accuracy, transparency and confidentiality firmly on the person lodging the document.
Why the Commission is acting
The Commission’s workload has increased by more than 70 per cent in the three years leading up to the end of the 2025–26 financial year, with the 2025-26 applications reaching a record of more than 53,000 cases. The increase has been concentrated among self-represented parties and has coincided with the widespread adoption of AI. Commission research indicates that AI can help people identify possible claims, navigate processes and express their case more clearly. It can also encourage people to lodge applications they might otherwise have considered inaccessible.
Those benefits come with significant limitations. The Commission’s research reported instances of AI recommending the wrong type of claim, overlooking eligibility requirements and filing deadlines, inventing cases and giving inflated predictions of success. Because AI produces outputs by identifying patterns in training data rather than reasoning as a lawyer would, confident and polished output produced by AI may still be wrong. The Commission’s approach is therefore not to prohibit AI, but to require transparent and accountable use.
The three core requirements
Requirement 1 – disclose whether and how AI was used. The obligation applies where AI was used to research, create, write, edit, modify or otherwise prepare an application or other document lodged with the Commission. The disclosure must identify the nature of the assistance, which may include: researching or getting advice about relevant law, eligibility to file the application, possible outcomes and/or Commission processes; organizing facts, evidence, the timeline, documents, etc. relating to the application; transcribing a person’s voice into written words; translating another language into English; writing or creating content used in the application; modifying or editing written content that the party has created and used in the application; and any other uses.
Using AI only for spelling, grammar or document formatting is excluded from this requirement.
Requirement 2 – check and verify the document. The person lodging a document prepared using AI must check and, where necessary, correct the content, then declare that this has been done. This includes confirming that facts and evidence are accurate and exist; cited cases, legislation, textbooks and articles exist and support the legal positions they are used for; quotations and extracts are accurate and come from the identified sources; and all other details are correct and relevant. The Commission’s forms and templates will include declarations to confirm this has been done, or a statement should be inserted to confirm this has been done for all other documents.
Requirement 3 – apply additional safeguards to witness statements and declarations. If AI has assisted in preparing witness material, the witness or declarant must check and amend it so that it is based on their own knowledge, reflects their own words and is true to the best of their knowledge. The document must record those matters. AI may assist with transcription or translation, but it should not be used to create the factual substance of a witness’s evidence.
Consequences of non-compliance
Properly disclosed AI use will not, of itself, affect the Commission’s assessment of the merits of a case. However, non-compliance with the AI disclosure requirements may affect the conduct or outcome of a case. The Commission may give a document less weight, disregard it, order a party to pay another party’s costs or dismiss the matter.
In the recent case of Khan v Aldi Pty Ltd [2026] FWC 3144, the Commission ordered Mr Khan to pay part of Aldi’s legal costs after he pursued an AI-prepared unfair dismissal claim with no reasonable prospects of success. Despite repeated warnings from the Commission that he did not satisfy the eligibility requirements, the AI-generated material failed to address that guidance and Mr Khan continued with the application.
It should also be noted that a false or misleading declaration may constitute a criminal offence which is punishable by up to 12 months imprisonment.
Confidentiality and privacy remain critical
Parties should not enter personal information about another person, confidential case material or legally privileged information into a public or insufficiently secure AI service. Prompts, documents and images may be retained or reused by a provider, including in some paid AI products. Uploading material covered by a non-publication or confidentiality order by the Commission may breach that order and may constitute an offence.
Practical takeaways
The new requirements recognise that generative AI can reduce barriers and improve the presentation of material, especially for self-represented litigants. Its central message, however, is that AI output must be treated as a starting point rather than an authority. The person filing the document remains responsible for its accuracy, relevance, authenticity and lawful handling and you must:
- Record whether AI was used and the specific tasks it performed.
- Verify every factual assertion, authority, quotation and procedural requirement against a reliable primary source.
- Ensure witness material remains the witness’s own evidence and words.
- Use secure systems and do not upload privileged, confidential, personal or restricted material without appropriate safeguards.
Please contact author Lawyer Rachael Munro at WGC Lawyers for assistance if you have any questions about the new guidance and requirements of the Commission or to review any documents before lodging them with the Commission.