---
title: "Check a draft witness statement or expert report against the proof and index the exhibits"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution/check-a-draft-witness-statement-or-expert-report-against-the-proof-and-i"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A6-T1-R5"
practice_area: "Arbitration & Alternative Dispute Resolution"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Check a draft witness statement or expert report against the proof and index the exhibits

> The tool writes no part of the witness statement and no part of the expert report — no draft, no first draft, no scaffold, no skeleton, no outline, no suggested paragraphs.…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution/check-a-draft-witness-statement-or-expert-report-against-the-proof-and-i  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Arbitration & Alternative Dispute Resolution](https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | The tool writes no part of the witness statement and no part of the expert report — no draft, no first draft, no scaffold, no skeleton, no outline, no suggested paragraphs. On the lawyer's draft statement: index the exhibits the draft refers to, compare the draft paragraph by paragraph against the proofing note and the source documents, and list every assertion in the draft for which no source is identified. On the expert's own draft report: list every opinion for which the report states no fact, assumption or reasoning, without suggesting what the opinion or its basis should be, and check that the expert's independence and code-of-conduct declaration is present and in the form the applicable rules require. For each of the two documents separately, also list the topics covered in the proof that the draft does not yet address, proposing no wording for them, and flag any departure from the tribunal's procedural orders on the form and length of the document. |
| What the lawyer must review | Before any of this material is uploaded, the lawyer settles the confidentiality position and confirms the tool's use is consistent with it — the confidentiality provisions of the Commercial Arbitration Act (ss 27E–27F) or, for an international arbitration, the International Arbitration Act 1974 (Cth) (ss 23C–23G), together with any confidentiality order of the tribunal or agreement of the parties. The lawyer takes the evidence from the witness and drafts the statement in the witness's own words, and the witness reads and adopts it before signing. The expert writes and signs their own report; the lawyer checks the independence and code-of-conduct declaration against the applicable rules, and if any gap list is given to the expert the lawyer records it as part of the expert's instructions and treats it as disclosable with them. |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer review required**

The responsible lawyer reviews the work against the instructions, sources and intended use.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording and summarising source material. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Confirm each factual assertion with the witness and original record. Preserve the witness’s own knowledge and words, and check the court’s rules for this document.
2. Check the specialist’s assumptions, qualifications and limits. Obtain the relevant expert or specialist review before relying on a technical conclusion.
3. Preserve original files and relevant metadata. Document provenance and handling, and seek forensic review where authenticity needs to be resolved.
4. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
5. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution/check-a-draft-witness-statement-or-expert-report-against-the-proof-and-i/united-states.md) | Red |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*