Introduction
This recent decision of the British Columbia Worker’s Compensation Appeal Tribunal (WCAT) addresses an issue that continues to be a hot topic of discussion in legal circles as AI has continued its rapid proliferation: the of use of AI in preparing legal submissions.
While AI‑assisted drafting tools can offer efficiency gains, they also introduce new professional, ethical, and strategic risks, especially where unverified AI‑generated content makes it way into written submissions. In the absence of guidance from either the WSIB or the WSIAT on the implications of AI use in the preparation of legal submissions, this case provides valuable insight on how they may address this issue in the future.
Facts
The background of this case was straightforward. The worker filed a prohibited action complaint with WorkSafeBC in September 2024, more than one year after his July 2023 termination. WorkSafeBC dismissed the complaint as out of time under section 49 of the Workers Compensation Act, which contains no provision permitting late filing. The worker appealed, arguing “special circumstances” should allow an extension and citing various medical, financial, cultural, and informational barriers. The Tribunal identified that the worker’s written submissions included citations to case law and policies that were incorrect or non‑existent. The summary decision found that the WCAT had no authority to accept a late complaint and dismissed the appeal as having no reasonable prospect of success.