---
title: "How to use AI for witness statements in Australia"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/guides/ai-witness-statements-australia"
type: "how_to_guide"
site: "AI Law Framework"
practice_area: "Litigation and tribunals"
---

# How to use AI for witness statements in Australia

> A witness statement is the witness’s evidence. Organising your notes is not the same thing as letting a model invent what the witness would have said.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/guides/ai-witness-statements-australia

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Check this before you rely on it

SC Gen 23 and the FCFCOA practice direction both restrict generative tools on witness evidence. Supreme Court of Victoria Practice Note SC Gen 25 replaced that Court’s May 2024 guidelines on 14 May 2026. Use the note for the court of the proceeding.

## Steps

1. **Check the restriction for this court.** SC Gen 23 restricts generative AI from generating the content of witness statements in the NSW Supreme Court, and the statement must say that generative AI was not used to generate that content. The FCFCOA direction restricts what may be put into a tool when the material is subpoenaed, suppressed, or about a child. SC Gen 25 is the Victorian Supreme Court note. They are not interchangeable.
2. **Do not let the tool generate or embellish the evidence.** Do not ask a model to “write what the witness would say” or to fill a gap in the conference note. That sentence is not the witness’s evidence, and in the NSW Supreme Court it is the use SC Gen 23 targets. If you do not have a note of the fact, you do not have the fact.
3. **Use a tool to organise notes only if the court allows it.** A chronology of the conference notes you already wrote can be a permitted organising step. Keep the source note attached to each line. If the court’s rule forbids generative content in the statement, the organised notes stay in the working papers and the statement is typed from them by a person.
4. **The witness adopts the words.** The witness reads the statement and confirms it is their account. A sentence they will not adopt is deleted, even if it is elegant. SC Gen 25 and SC Gen 23 both leave accuracy with the person putting the evidence forward.
5. **Disclose what the note requires.** If the court requires you to say that a tool organised the brief, say that, and do not say the witness’s words were generated if they were not. If the note requires leave, get it before the statement is signed.

## Questions

**Is it allowed to use AI for witness statements in Australia?**

Generating the content is restricted in the NSW Supreme Court by SC Gen 23, and other courts set their own limits. Read the note before the conference is written up.

**What tools are used for witness statements?**

The useful record is the conference note. A generative tool is not a witness. This guide does not recommend a product for writing evidence.

**Can the witness’s own chatbot draft their statement?**

Not for a statement you will file, if the court’s note forbids generated content. The witness still has to adopt every sentence, and you still have to comply with the note.

## Sources

- [NSW SC Gen 23](https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdf)
- [FCFCOA PD: Use of AI](https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/pd/pd-ai)
- [Supreme Court of Victoria Practice Note SC Gen 25](https://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au/areas/legal-resources/practice-notes/sc-gen-25-the-use-of-artificial-intelligence-by-court-users)

## Related

- [Affidavits](https://ailawframework.com/guides/ai-affidavits-australia.md)
- [NSW SC Gen 23](https://ailawframework.com/courts/sc-gen-generative-ai-nsw-supreme-court.md)
- [Supreme Court of Victoria](https://ailawframework.com/courts/sc-gen-victoria-ai-practice-note.md)
- [FCFCOA practice direction](https://ailawframework.com/courts/fcfcoa-ai-practice-direction.md)