Think Twice Before Letting ChatGPT Draft Your Employment Tribunal Claim

Artificial intelligence is an impressive tool. It can summarise information, generate ideas and even produce documents that appear polished and persuasive. However, a recent decision of the Employment Appeal Tribunal (EAT) serves as a stark warning to anyone considering using ChatGPT or other generative AI platforms to prepare Employment Tribunal proceedings without professional legal advice.

The message from the EAT is clear: if you submit documents to a court or tribunal, you are responsible for their contents, whether they were written by you, your solicitor, or ChatGPT.

The Case: Hancox v Sutherland and Others [2026] EAT 139

In Mr T Hancox v Kenneth Sutherland and Others [2026] EAT 139, a litigant in person appealed a strike out decision and filed a 300-page skeleton argument generated using ChatGPT, containing almost 132,000 words.

The EAT described the document as “entirely unacceptable”, finding that it failed to comply with the Tribunal’s Practice Direction and that it served to”obscure rather than to illuminate” the issues. Rather than assisting the Tribunal, the document made the appeal more difficult to understand.

Perhaps even more concerning was the appellant’s suggestion that the respondents should identify any inaccuracies, incorrect quotations, faulty references or other errors in the document. The EAT firmly rejected this approach, emphasising that the responsibility for checking the accuracy of AI-generated material rests squarely with the person submitting it.

The Growing Problem With AI in Litigation

The EAT noted that it has seen a significant increase in the use of AI-generated documents in legal proceedings. While the Tribunal accepted that AI can potentially assist litigants in person, it highlighted the substantial dangers associated with relying on AI without careful scrutiny.

These dangers include:

• Inventing legal authorities that do not exist.
• Misquoting genuine cases.
• Misstating legal principles.
• Referring to incorrect statutory provisions.
• Producing lengthy and unfocused submissions.
• Omitting crucial procedural requirements.
• Including arguments that have no legal relevance.

Why This Matters in Employment Tribunal Cases

Many prospective claimants are tempted to save legal costs by asking ChatGPT to draft an ET1 claim form or other documents within the proceedings.

That decision can prove extremely costly.

Employment Tribunal claims are won and lost at an early stage. The details contained within an ET1 often define the scope of the case. A poorly drafted claim can:

• Exclude valid causes of action.
• Fail to identify the correct respondent.
• Miss important limitation issues.
• Omit key factual allegations.
• Prevent important claims from being pursued later.
• Lead to strike out applications or deposit orders.

An AI-generated claim may look professionally written, but that does not mean it is legally correct. In fact, one of the greatest risks is that AI often writes with complete confidence, even when it is wrong.

A claimant who relies upon an inaccurate AI-generated pleading may find themselves facing procedural challenges, adverse costs arguments, or even having potentially valuable claims dismissed.

The Tribunal Will Not Accept “ChatGPT Made the Mistake”

One of the most important aspects of the EAT’s guidance is that responsibility cannot be delegated to AI.

The EAT stated that litigants using AI must ensure that documents:

1. Comply with procedural rules.
2. Have been checked thoroughly for factual and legal accuracy.
3. Contain only relevant points presented clearly and concisely.

If those checks are not carried out, the Tribunal warned that judicial scrutiny and potential sanctions may follow.

In other words, “ChatGPT drafted it” will not be an excuse.

The Value of Professional Legal Advice

Employment law is not simply about completing forms. It requires strategic judgment.

An experienced employment solicitor will consider:

• The strongest causes of action available.
• Whether claims are in time.
• The evidence needed to prove those claims.
• The likely value of compensation.
• Settlement opportunities.
• Procedural risks.
• How allegations should be pleaded to maximise prospects of success.

These are matters that require legal expertise and experience, not merely the ability to generate text.

AI may be a useful administrative tool. It is not a substitute for professional legal advice.

How We Can Help

Whether you are bringing a claim against your employer or defending proceedings as an employer, obtaining specialist legal advice at an early stage can significantly improve your prospects of success.

We regularly assist clients with:

• Drafting ET1 and ET3 forms.
• Advising on unfair dismissal, discrimination and whistleblowing claims.
• Preparing witness statements.
• Negotiating settlement agreements.
• Representing parties at Employment Tribunal hearings and appeals.

If you are considering bringing or defending an Employment Tribunal claim, contact our employment law team for specialist advice before submitting documents that could have lasting consequences for your case.