The Quebec Superior Court’s 2024 decision in Centre de services scolaire des Laurentides c. Syndicat de l’enseignement des Laurentides remains the leading Canadian case to address an adjudicator’s undisclosed use of artificial intelligence. The court overturned an arbitration award after the arbitrator admitted to using ChatGPT to assist in writing the decision. Since that ruling, several courts and professional bodies have issued new guidance reinforcing the need for transparency in the legal profession’s use of AI. The British Columbia Supreme Court introduced a practice direction in 2025 requiring lawyers to disclose when AI tools are used in preparing materials, echoing similar directions in the Yukon and Manitoba. The Federal Court of Canada has also urged parties to indicate when submissions are drafted or assisted by AI. Courts in the United States and the United Kingdom have taken parallel steps, prompted by incidents involving fabricated AI citations.
These developments reflect a growing global movement toward responsible AI use in legal decision‑making and advocacy. Governments and international institutions are beginning to establish coordinated frameworks for AI governance, risk reduction, and ethical accountability. The European Union’s Artificial Intelligence Act has emerged as the first comprehensive legislative model, classifying AI uses by risk level and imposing obligations proportional to potential harm. Multilateral discussions at the United Nations and the G7 are now focusing on common definitions of ethical use, transparency, and explainability. Collectively, these efforts illustrate that legal systems worldwide are transitioning from fragmented experimentation to structured governance, even as approaches remain diverse and evolving.
It was against this dynamic global backdrop that the Ontario Bar Association’s International Law Section hosted the webinar AI and International Legal Risk: Governance, Accountability, and the Evolution of Global Legal Standards. The program was chaired by Elena Mamay, litigator at Mann Lawyers, and featured Professor Jake Okechukwu Effoduh, Assistant Professor at the Lincoln Alexander School of Law and Senior Fellow at CIGI, and Lauren Nickerson, AI and Litigation Associate at Torys LLP. Together, they examined how shifting international frameworks intersect with the daily realities of legal risk management in Canada.
From an academic standpoint, Professor Effoduh described the international landscape as a “colourful salad of divergent norms.” He examined how differing cultural values and national priorities have produced uneven AI standards across jurisdictions. This fragmentation complicates accountability and raises questions about cross‑border enforcement and cooperation. Effoduh also pointed to the weaponization of AI through deepfakes in election interference, warning that democratic societies must act collectively to preserve credibility and trust in information systems.
Lauren Nickerson provided a complementary practical perspective drawn from her AI advisory and dispute‑resolution experience. She explained how organizations are designing internal governance structures, developing AI oversight protocols, and updating compliance frameworks. She also highlighted prospective areas of dispute that could arise in connection with AI and the efforts courts are making to ensure they are equipped to adjudicate such matters. While acknowledging regulatory uncertainty, she compared today’s AI challenges to earlier technological transformations such as the printing press and the internet, arguing that established legal doctrines can still offer a reliable foundation for managing new risks.
The discussion also explored the readiness of courts to adjudicate AI‑related disputes, addressing questions about the admissibility of AI‑generated evidence, disclosure obligations in pleadings, and judicial methods for validating AI‑related materials.
Overall, the webinar provided an informed, multidimensional view of how Canada and the global legal community are adapting to the realities of AI. It reminded practitioners that governance, accountability, and ethical judgment remain central to legal practice in an era defined by technological complexity.
Any article or other information or content expressed or made available in this Section is that of the respective author(s) and not of the OBA.