---
title: "Review arbitrator AI-use disclosure and assess a challenge"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution/review-arbitrator-ai-use-disclosure-and-assess-a-challenge"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A6-T1-R14"
practice_area: "Arbitration & Alternative Dispute Resolution"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Review arbitrator AI-use disclosure and assess a challenge

> Extract the arbitrator's AI disclosure (if any) and the applicable rules/guidance into a comparison table for the lawyer.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/arbitration-and-alternative-dispute-resolution/review-arbitrator-ai-use-disclosure-and-assess-a-challenge  
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 | Extract the arbitrator's AI disclosure (if any) and the applicable rules/guidance into a comparison table for the lawyer. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide yourself whether non-disclosure founds a challenge Do not send a challenge on a generated analysis |
| 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 identifying points for review. 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. Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
2. Review the original source set for relevant material absent from the output, including contrary evidence, qualifications and unresolved gaps.
3. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
4. 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/review-arbitrator-ai-use-disclosure-and-assess-a-challenge/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.*