---
title: "Check authorities and evidence before filing submissions"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/commercial-litigation-and-dispute-resolution/check-authorities-and-evidence-before-filing-submissions"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A5-P20260916-3"
practice_area: "Commercial Litigation & Dispute Resolution"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Check authorities and evidence before filing submissions

> Extract citations, quotations and evidence references from a draft into a verification table.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/commercial-litigation-and-dispute-resolution/check-authorities-and-evidence-before-filing-submissions  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Commercial Litigation & Dispute Resolution](https://ailawframework.com/practice/commercial-litigation-and-dispute-resolution.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Extract citations, quotations and evidence references from a draft into a verification table. |
| What the lawyer must review | Verify each reference directly in reliable sources Record the required statement in the submissions where the court requires one |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Verify against sources**

The lawyer verifies each reference directly in reliable sources and records the required statement in the submissions where the court requires one.

- What the AI does: Extract citations, quotations and evidence references from a draft into a verification table.
- What the lawyer does: Make the legal assessment, check the source material and authorise the output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Lawyer competent in this practice area
- Basis: Practical workflow informed by the linked primary sources; the traffic light and working checks are editorial guidance, not a court classification.
- Why: The level reflects the consequence of an error and the amount of independent review the described output needs.
- Written for: NSW

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Open every cited authority in a reliable legal source and verify identity, pinpoint, quotation, proposition and relevance.
2. Check that legislation is the applicable version and consider later or contrary authority.
3. Verify every factual reference against the actual exhibit, affidavit or transcript, including surrounding qualifications.
4. For NSW Supreme Court work, comply with SC Gen 23 paragraphs 16–18; verification cannot be carried out solely by GenAI.

## Notes

- These are suggested working checks. The cited court, tribunal or scheme requirements apply only within their stated scope.

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: NSW Supreme Court; adapt separately for another court

**Deliverable**: A verified citation and evidence-reference table for the final draft.

**Inputs**

- Final draft submissions
- Authoritative legal sources
- Referenced evidence

**Example**: Illustrative example: A judgment exists, but paragraph 42 concerns a different issue. The table marks the proposition unsupported so the submission can be corrected.

**Stop and escalate when**

- An authority, quotation or factual assertion cannot be verified.
- The draft changes after the verification without checking the affected references.

Checked 2026-09-16.

## Sources

- [Supreme Court of NSW: SC Gen 23, amended 28 January 2025](https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/documents/Practice-and-Procedure/Practice-Notes/general/current/PN_SC_Gen_23.pdf) (checked 2026-09-16)

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/commercial-litigation-and-dispute-resolution/check-authorities-and-evidence-before-filing-submissions/united-states.md) | Yellow |

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