AI: the ultimate (client's) toolbox?
June 22, 2026Author: Caroline Fiévez
AI: the ultimate (client’s) toolbox?
In previous blogs, my colleague Roeland Zwanikken discussed the lawyer’s toolbox. Zwanikken explained that there are often multiple legal options for resolving a legal problem. Clients, however, may wonder: isn’t AI the best and free (!) tool in that toolbox?
More costs instead of less
It’s tempting to think that AI can replace the need for external legal advice and to save on lawyers’ costs, or that costs can be reduced by providing your lawyer with your own drafts, created with the help of AI. However, as explained below, this does not always lead to positive results and may even lead to the opposite: more costs instead of less.
Legal inaccuracies: abuse of procedural law
In a recent ruling by a court in the Netherlands, the claimant proceeded without a lawyer. The judge ruled1 against the claimant, finding not only that his claim was clearly unfounded, but also that his court documents were incomprehensible because of the use of AI. The claimant’s court documents referred to incorrect statutory provisions and contained legal inaccuracies. The judge held it against the claimant that his court documents had not been reviewed by a lawyer. The incomprehensibility of his documents caused the opposing party additional time and effort to understand and respond. This was considered an abuse of procedural law, as a result of which the claimant was ordered to pay the full legal costs of the opposing party.
Harming client’s interest, misleading the opposing party
In another Dutch case, a judge suspected that a lawyer had drafted parts of a procedural document using AI. The judge indicated that this was problematic because it could harm the client’s interests and mislead the opposing party. As this was only a suspicion, the judge ruled that the lawyer had to provide further explanation in a subsequent submission.2
In yet another Dutch ruling, the judge noted a suspicion that references to case law had been generated via ChatGPT or a similar tool and had been included in the documents without verification.3 However, this had no consequences for the claimant.
Lengthy proceedings
AI may be a useful tool and has become an integral part of legal practice. However, it should not be used blindly. AI still makes mistakes, which can be costly for users in legal proceedings. It may even be considered unlawful toward the opposing party if it causes them damages. The user of AI may then be held liable for these damages — including, for example, the full legal costs of the opposing party.
Proceedings may also take longer, for example because a party may need to provide further clarification on the use of AI, or because a submission contains so many references that the court must verify them all, which also requires additional time. Consequently, judgments may be delayed.
ineffective contracts
Also, outside court proceedings, the use of AI can be detrimental. For example, when drafting contracts with the help of AI, there is a risk that provisions are included that are contradictory, have no legal effect under our law, or are not enforceable.
No savings on legal fees
If you think you can save costs by providing your lawyer with AI-generated documents, you may be mistaken too. The lawyer will need to verify everything you submit that was created with AI. This takes additional time and may therefore lead to higher costs.
At present, AI is therefore not yet the (client’s) ultimate toolbox.
Disclaimer:
This blog provides general information and is not intended as legal advice. BZSE strongly recommends seeking personalized legal counsel based on your specific circumstances before making any decisions or taking action.
Sint Maarten, June 22, 2026
Caroline Fiévez,
attorney at BZSE Attorneys at Law/Tax Lawyers
More articles →
In previous blogs, my colleague Roeland Zwanikken discussed the lawyer’s toolbox. Zwanikken explained that there are often multiple legal options for resolving a legal problem. Clients, however, may wonder: isn’t AI the best and free (!) tool in that toolbox?
More costs instead of less
It’s tempting to think that AI can replace the need for external legal advice and to save on lawyers’ costs, or that costs can be reduced by providing your lawyer with your own drafts, created with the help of AI. However, as explained below, this does not always lead to positive results and may even lead to the opposite: more costs instead of less.
Legal inaccuracies: abuse of procedural law
In a recent ruling by a court in the Netherlands, the claimant proceeded without a lawyer. The judge ruled1 against the claimant, finding not only that his claim was clearly unfounded, but also that his court documents were incomprehensible because of the use of AI. The claimant’s court documents referred to incorrect statutory provisions and contained legal inaccuracies. The judge held it against the claimant that his court documents had not been reviewed by a lawyer. The incomprehensibility of his documents caused the opposing party additional time and effort to understand and respond. This was considered an abuse of procedural law, as a result of which the claimant was ordered to pay the full legal costs of the opposing party.
Harming client’s interest, misleading the opposing party
In another Dutch case, a judge suspected that a lawyer had drafted parts of a procedural document using AI. The judge indicated that this was problematic because it could harm the client’s interests and mislead the opposing party. As this was only a suspicion, the judge ruled that the lawyer had to provide further explanation in a subsequent submission.2
In yet another Dutch ruling, the judge noted a suspicion that references to case law had been generated via ChatGPT or a similar tool and had been included in the documents without verification.3 However, this had no consequences for the claimant.
Lengthy proceedings
AI may be a useful tool and has become an integral part of legal practice. However, it should not be used blindly. AI still makes mistakes, which can be costly for users in legal proceedings. It may even be considered unlawful toward the opposing party if it causes them damages. The user of AI may then be held liable for these damages — including, for example, the full legal costs of the opposing party.
Proceedings may also take longer, for example because a party may need to provide further clarification on the use of AI, or because a submission contains so many references that the court must verify them all, which also requires additional time. Consequently, judgments may be delayed.
ineffective contracts
Also, outside court proceedings, the use of AI can be detrimental. For example, when drafting contracts with the help of AI, there is a risk that provisions are included that are contradictory, have no legal effect under our law, or are not enforceable.
No savings on legal fees
If you think you can save costs by providing your lawyer with AI-generated documents, you may be mistaken too. The lawyer will need to verify everything you submit that was created with AI. This takes additional time and may therefore lead to higher costs.
At present, AI is therefore not yet the (client’s) ultimate toolbox.
Disclaimer:
This blog provides general information and is not intended as legal advice. BZSE strongly recommends seeking personalized legal counsel based on your specific circumstances before making any decisions or taking action.
Sint Maarten, June 22, 2026
Caroline Fiévez,
attorney at BZSE Attorneys at Law/Tax Lawyers
More articles →