Is it allowed to use AI for client intake chatbots in Australia?
Yes, if the visitor is told it is a tool and not advice, the firm collects the minimum, and a lawyer reviews the intake before the firm advises.
Guide
An intake chatbot collects personal information and can look like a solicitor. Say that it is a tool, collect less, and have a lawyer read the intake before any advice.
The first screen states that the person is talking to a tool, that the firm has not yet accepted the matter, and that the answers are not legal advice. The Uniform Law regulators’ statement does not let a bot hold out as a solicitor. Keep that sentence visible, not in a footer the visitor never sees.
Ask for what the firm needs to decide whether it can act. Do not ask the bot to “get the whole story” before a person has read the conflict and the court rules. The OAIC’s guidance on commercial AI products is the privacy reading of a form that over-collects.
Know where the transcript is stored, who else can see it, and whether it trains a model. Queensland Guidance Statement No. 37 and the Law Society of New South Wales guide both expect that reading before client information goes in. The privacy tracker on this site lists the regulator pages.
Conflicts, urgency, limitation and the forum are a solicitor’s check. The bot does not open a file by itself and it does not send advice. If the transcript is wrong, the lawyer asks the client, not the model.
Record the checks: Confidentiality tasks · Open the court note for the forum
Confidentiality tasks · Law firm AI policy · Telling clients about AI use · Privacy and regulator guidance · All guides
Yes, if the visitor is told it is a tool and not advice, the firm collects the minimum, and a lawyer reviews the intake before the firm advises.
Use a vendor the firm has read the privacy terms for. This page does not approve a chatbot product. A consumer account is the wrong tenancy.
No. That is advice. The bot can collect facts. A solicitor decides what they mean.