The High Court in Nairobi has set aside a December 23, 2025, judgment in a landmark ruling that declared the use of undisclosed artificial intelligence tools in drafting pleadings an abuse of court process and incompatible with fair trial principles.
In a ruling delivered by Justice J. Chigiti (SC) at the Milimani High Court, the court found that pleadings generated using “unknown tools or artificial intelligence” without disclosure compromised the integrity of the judicial process and gave litigants an unfair advantage.
“The generation of pleadings through unknown tools or artificial intelligence gives an unfair advantage to the person drafting using such tools,” the court held, adding that this amounted to “an abuse of the court” and offended the rules of natural justice.
The judge further stated that courts cannot verify such tools, making it “next to impossible” to determine which portions of pleadings are human-authored or machine-generated.
The decision arose from an application seeking to set aside a judgment issued in December 2025, with the applicant arguing it had been condemned unheard due to procedural confusion and alleged non-service of amended pleadings.
However, the court dismissed this explanation, noting that litigants must comply with procedural timelines and cannot rely on what it termed “personalized drafting tools, structures and methodologies that are not provided for under the rules of drafting.”
Justice Chigiti stressed that uniformity in pleadings is essential for fair adjudication, stating: “To allow that would create a litigation disaster leaving the judges with no guiding beacons to propel the proceedings.”
The court further held that allowing AI-generated pleadings without regulation would undermine access to justice under Article 48 of the Constitution and equality before the law under Article 27.
The court also struck out a related application and directed that the applicant’s motion dated January 20, 2026 be dismissed with costs.
The judge warned against filing machine-generated pleadings in the future, stating: “The ex parte applicant is hereby barred from filing any other pleadings in any court which are machine generated unless there is a law in Kenya allowing or providing for the drafting using artificial intelligence tools.”
While acknowledging the potential of technology, the court noted that Kenya is still developing a regulatory framework, stating that artificial intelligence may only be embraced fully once proper legislation is in place.
The ruling also condemned the applicant to costs, with the court emphasizing finality in litigation and judicial discipline in civil procedure.
Comments
Sign in with Google to comment, reply, and like comments.
Continue with Google