Murray obh of Wamba Wemba Native Title Claim Group v Victoria [2025] FCA 731

A recent Federal Court decision serves as a cautionary warning on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) when preparing documents in native title claims.[1] This is the first time the use of artificial intelligence in native title claims has been considered by the Court.[2]

In Murray obh of Wamba Wemba Native Title Claim Group v Victoria [2025] FCA 731, Justice Murphy awarded costs against the then solicitor for the Applicant personally. This was because a junior solicitor prepared footnotes to an Amended Native Title Determination Application (a Form 1), using Google Scholar. The footnotes were then used in a summary document. The footnotes, however, were fabricated.[3]

Justice Murphy found that, in addition to the judgment itself criticising the conduct, indemnity costs should be awarded against the solicitors personally because of the cost and delay to the parties and the compromise to the administration of justice.[4]

The use of artificial intelligence is rapidly evolving but has its limitations.[5] The decision highlights the need for lawyers to maintain professional obligations and adopt appropriate supervisory practices, notwithstanding the availability of artificial intelligence as a tool for research and drafting.[6]

This is general commentary only and is not legal advice. If you are unsure how this commentary may relate to you, seek legal advice.

For more information, contact us.

[1] Murray obh of Wamba Wemba Native Title Claim Group v Victoria [2025] FCA 731.

[2] Native Title News — August 2025 (2025) 15(5) NTN 98.

[3] Above n 1, at [5].

[4] See Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) s 85A(2).

[5] See Federal Court of Australia “Notice to the Profession: Artificial Intelligence Use in the Federal Court of Australia” media release (29 April 2025) .

[6] Above n 2.