Alternative dispute resolution Archives | Digital Watch Observatory

Practice Note on AI issued by Australia’s Supreme Court of Victoria

Australia’s Supreme Court of Victoria has issued a Practice Note for court users and Judicial Guidelines for judicial officers on the use of AI, setting out how the technology may be used in court processes while preserving accuracy, privacy, accountability and fairness.

The Practice Note recognises that AI may enhance access to justice, but warns court users to understand the risks when using AI to prepare court documents. It states that users remain responsible for the content of documents they file, whether or not AI has been used.

Court users are also warned that filing documents containing inaccuracies could lead to costs orders. The Practice Note outlines privacy issues linked to different types of AI tools and notes possible sanctions for legal practitioners who rely on unverified AI outputs.

The Judicial Guidelines state that generative AI must not be used for judicial decision-making. Court-approved AI tools may, however, assist judicial officers and court staff with supportive tasks such as organising and locating case materials, producing summaries and chronologies, aiding legal research and proofreading.

The guidelines stress that such uses are not a substitute for reading or listening to evidence and submissions, or for fact-finding where required in judicial decision-making. Judicial officers must consider each matter before them and exercise their own judgement in reaching decisions and giving reasons where appropriate.

The Court said the new documents build on earlier AI guidelines developed in 2024 and respond to a review by the Victorian Law Reform Commission. Chief Justice Richard Niall said the Practice Note and Judicial Guidelines would help mitigate actual and perceived risks of AI use.

Niall said AI should be ‘an aid to, not a replacement of, judicial decision-making’, adding that the Court would continue adapting its practice without sacrificing impartiality, privacy, accountability and fairness.

Why does it matter?

The guidance shows how courts are beginning to define practical limits for AI use without banning it entirely. By allowing supportive uses while excluding generative AI from judicial decision-making, Victoria’s Supreme Court is drawing a line between administrative assistance and the exercise of judicial judgement, a distinction likely to become increasingly important as AI tools enter legal practice.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Generative AI guidance issued by Australia’s New South Wales tribunal

The New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal has issued guidance on the acceptable use of generative AI in tribunal proceedings as part of Privacy Awareness Week NSW 2026, which this year focuses on personal information risks in the age of AI.

According to NCAT, generative AI tools may be used to assist with administrative and organisational tasks such as summarising material, organising information, or preparing chronologies. At the same time, the tribunal warns that such tools can create privacy risks if users enter personal, sensitive, or confidential information.

The guidance is set out in NCAT Procedural Direction 7 on the use of generative AI, together with an accompanying fact sheet. NCAT says the aim is to clarify when generative AI may be used in tribunal-related work while reinforcing obligations to protect personal and confidential information.

The tribunal also draws a clear line around evidentiary material. Generative AI must not be used to generate or alter evidence in tribunal proceedings, including statements, affidavits, statutory declarations, character references, or other evidentiary documents.

NCAT further states that generative AI must not be used to generate content for an expert report unless the tribunal has given permission. It is encouraging parties and their representatives to review the guidance before using such tools in proceedings.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

DMCC Act 2024 brings UK ADR reporting rules into force

UK regulations under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers (DMCC) Act 2024, referred to here as the DMCC Act 2024, are now in force, requiring accredited alternative dispute resolution providers to report information to the ADR authority and to make it available to consumers on their websites.

Under the DMCC Act 2024 (Alternative Dispute Resolution) (Information) Regulations, an accredited ADR provider must submit an annual report to the ADR authority in writing on a durable medium.

An accredited ADR provider is a person or entity that either conducts alternative dispute resolution for a consumer contract dispute or arranges for it to occur. The same information must also be published for consumers on the provider’s website within one month of each anniversary of accreditation.

Accredited ADR providers must also notify the ADR authority of any changes to the information listed in Part 2 of the Schedule. Former accredited ADR providers are required to submit a Part 1 report within one month after their accreditation ends.

Exempt ADR providers must provide the information in Parts 1 and 2 of the Schedule to the ADR authority to the extent that the same information is also supplied to a regulator, and must do so within one month of providing it to that regulator.

Why does it matter?

The DMCC Act 2024 regulations add transparency to the UK ADR system. Accredited providers must now report information to the ADR authority and publish it for consumers, creating clearer oversight and making it easier to see how accredited schemes operate.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

The Board of Peace for Gaza: Assessing its legal boundaries and impact on the UN

The adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 2803 (2025) marked a significant development in international engagement with the Gaza conflict.

Central to the resolution is the endorsement of a Comprehensive plan to end the Gaza Conflict and the establishment of the ‘Board of Peace’, entrusted with transitional governance and security responsibilities in Gaza.

The initiative has sparked intense debate among diplomats, legal scholars, and policy practitioners. While some view the Board of Peace as a pragmatic response to a prolonged failure of existing approaches, others raise concerns about mandate overreach, accountability, respect for self-determination, and potential erosion of the United Nations’ institutional role.

Webinar objectives:

Clarify the legal boundaries of international transitional governance under UN auspices;
Assess institutional and accountability risks arising from delegated governance mechanisms; and,
Examine longer-term implications for the UN Security Council and the future of (effective) multilateralism.

Horizon1000 aims to bring powerful AI healthcare tools to Africa

The Gates Foundation and OpenAI have launched a joint healthcare initiative, Horizon1000, to expand the use of AI across primary care systems in Sub-Saharan Africa. The partnership includes a $50 million commitment in funding, technology, and technical support to equip 1,000 clinics with AI tools by 2028.

Horizon1000’s Operations will begin in Rwanda, where local authorities will work with the two organisations to deploy AI systems in frontline healthcare settings. The initiative reflects the Foundation’s long-standing aim to ensure that new technologies reach lower-income regions without long delays.

Bill Gates said the project responds to a critical shortage of healthcare workers, which threatens to undermine decades of progress in global health. Sub-Saharan Africa currently faces a shortfall of nearly six million medical professionals, limiting the capacity of overstretched clinics to deliver consistent care.

Low-quality healthcare contributes to between six and eight million deaths annually in low- and middle-income countries, according to the World Health Organization. Rwanda, the first pilot country, has only one healthcare worker per 1,000 people, far below the WHO’s recommended level.

AI tools under Horizon1000 are intended to support, rather than replace, health workers by assisting with clinical guidance, administration, and patient interactions. The Gates Foundation said it will continue working with regional governments and innovators to scale the programme.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Canadian news publishers clash with OpenAI in landmark copyright case

OpenAI is set to argue in an Ontario court that a copyright lawsuit by Canadian news publishers should be heard in the United States. The case, the first of its kind in Canada, alleges that OpenAI scraped Canadian news content to train ChatGPT without permission or payment.

The coalition of publishers, including CBC/Radio-Canada, The Globe and Mail, and Postmedia, says the material was created and hosted in Ontario, making the province the proper venue. They warn that accepting OpenAI’s stance would undermine Canadian sovereignty in the digital economy.

OpenAI, however, says the training of its models and web crawling occurred outside Canada and that the Copyright Act cannot apply extraterritorially. It argues the publishers are politicising the case by framing it as a matter of sovereignty rather than jurisdiction.

The dispute reflects a broader global clash over how generative AI systems use copyrighted works. US courts are already handling several similar cases, though no clear precedent has been established on whether such use qualifies as fair use.

Publishers argue Canadian courts must decide the matter domestically, while OpenAI insists it belongs in US courts. The outcome could shape how copyright laws apply to AI training and digital content across borders.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Indian firms accelerate growth through AI, Microsoft finds

Indian firms are accelerating the adoption of AI, with many using AI agents to enhance workforce capabilities rather than relying solely on traditional methods.

According to Microsoft’s 2025 Work Trend Index, 93% of leaders in India plan to extend AI integration across their organisations within the next 12 to 18 months.

Frontier firms in India are leading the charge, redesigning operations around collaboration between humans and AI agents instead of following conventional hierarchies.

Over half of leaders already deploy AI to automate workflows and business processes across entire teams, enabling faster and more agile decision-making.

Microsoft notes that AI is becoming a true thought partner, fuelling creativity, accelerating decisions, and redefining teamwork instead of merely supporting routine tasks. Leaders report that embedding AI into daily operations drives measurable improvements in productivity, innovation, and business outcomes.

The findings are part of a global survey of 31,000 participants across 31 countries, highlighting India’s role at the forefront of AI-driven organisational transformation rather than merely following international trends.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Musk–Altman clash escalates over Apple’s alleged AI bias

Elon Musk has accused Apple of favouring ChatGPT on its App Store and threatened legal action, sparking a clash with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. Musk called Apple’s practices an antitrust violation and vowed to take immediate action through his AI company, xAI.

Critics on X noted rivals like DeepSeek AI and Perplexity AI have topped the App Store this year. Altman called Musk’s claim ‘remarkable’ and accused him of manipulating X. Musk called him a ‘liar’, prompting demands for proof he never altered X’s algorithm.

OpenAI and xAI launched new versions of ChatGPT and Grok, ranked first and fifth among free iPhone apps on Tuesday. Apple, which partnered with OpenAI in 2024 to integrate ChatGPT, did not comment on the matter. Rankings take into account engagement, reviews, and downloads.

The dispute reignites a feud between Musk and OpenAI, which he co-founded but left before the success of ChatGPT. In April, OpenAI accused Musk of attempting to harm the company and establish a rival. Musk launched xAI in 2023 to compete with major players in the AI space.

Chinese startup DeepSeek has disrupted the AI market with cost-efficient models. Since ChatGPT’s 2022 debut, major tech firms have invested billions in AI. OpenAI claims Musk’s actions are driven by ambition rather than a mission for humanity’s benefit.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Apple’s $20B Google deal under threat as AI lags behind rivals

Apple is set to release Q3 earnings on Thursday amid scrutiny over its Google search deal dependencies and ongoing struggles with AI progress.

Typically, Apple’s fiscal Q3 garners less investor attention, with anticipation focused instead on the upcoming iPhone launch in Q4. However, this quarter is proving to be anything but ordinary.

Analysts and shareholders alike are increasingly concerned about two looming threats: a potential $20 billion hit to Apple’s Services revenue tied to the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) antitrust case against Google, and ongoing delays in Apple’s AI efforts.

Ahead of the earnings report, Apple shares were mostly unchanged, reflecting investor caution rather than enthusiasm. Apple’s most pressing challenge stems from its lucrative partnership with Google.

In 2022, Google paid Apple approximately $20 billion to remain the default search engine in the Safari browser and across Siri.

The exclusivity deal has formed a significant portion of Apple’s Services segment, which generated $78.1 billion in revenue that year, making Google’s contribution alone account for more than 25% of that figure.

However, a ruling expected next month from Judge Amit Mehta in the US District Court for the District of Columbia could threaten the entire arrangement. Mehta previously found Google guilty of operating an illegal monopoly in the search market.

The forthcoming ‘remedies’ ruling could force Google to end exclusive search deals, divest its Chrome browser, and provide data access to rivals. Should the DOJ’s proposed remedies stand and Google fails to overturn the ruling, Apple could lose a critical source of Services revenue.

According to Morgan Stanley’s Erik Woodring, Apple could see a 12% decline in its full-year 2027 earnings per share (EPS) if it pivots to less lucrative partnerships with alternative search engines.

The user experience may also deteriorate if customers can no longer set Google as their default option. A more radical scenario, Apple launching its search engine, could dent its 2024 EPS by as much as 20%, though analysts believe this outcome is the least likely.

Alongside regulatory threats, Apple is also facing growing doubts about its ability to compete in AI. Apple has not yet set a clear timeline for releasing an upgraded version of Siri, while rivals accelerate AI hiring and unveil new capabilities.

Bank of America analyst Wamsi Mohan noted this week that persistent delays undermine confidence in Apple’s ability to deliver innovation at the pace. ‘Apple’s ability to drive future growth depends on delivering new capabilities and products on time,’ he wrote to investors.

‘If deadlines keep slipping, that potentially delays revenue opportunities and gives competitors a larger window to attract customers.’

While Apple has teased upcoming AI features for future software updates, the lack of a commercial rollout or product roadmap has made investors uneasy, particularly as rivals like Microsoft, Google, and OpenAI continue to set the AI agenda.

Although Apple’s stock remained stable before Thursday’s earnings release, any indication of slowing services growth or missed AI milestones could shake investor confidence.

Analysts will be watching closely for commentary from CEO Tim Cook on how Apple plans to navigate regulatory risks and revive momentum in emerging technologies.

The company’s current crossroads is pivotal for the tech sector more broadly. Regulators are intensifying scrutiny on platform dominance, and AI innovation is fast becoming the new battleground for long-term growth.

As Apple attempts to defend its business model and rekindle its innovation edge, Thursday’s earnings update could serve as a bellwether for its direction in the post-iPhone era.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!

Italy investigates Meta over AI integration in WhatsApp

Italy’s antitrust watchdog has investigated Meta Platforms over allegations that the company may have abused its dominant position by integrating its AI assistant directly into WhatsApp.

The Rome-based authority, formally known as the Autorità Garante della Concorrenza e del Mercato (AGCM), announced the probe on Wednesday, stating that Meta may have breached European Union competition regulations.

The regulator claims that the introduction of the Meta AI assistant into WhatsApp was carried out without obtaining prior user consent, potentially distorting market competition.

Meta AI, the company’s virtual assistant designed to provide chatbot-style responses and other generative AI functions, has been embedded in WhatsApp since March 2025. It is accessible through the app’s search bar and is intended to offer users conversational AI services directly within the messaging interface.

The AGCM is concerned that this integration may unfairly favour Meta’s AI services by leveraging the company’s dominant position in the messaging market. It warned that such a move could steer users toward Meta’s products, limit consumer choice, and disadvantage competing AI providers.

‘By pairing Meta AI with WhatsApp, Meta appears to be able to steer its user base into the new market not through merit-based competition, but by ‘forcing’ users to accept the availability of two distinct services,’ the authority said.

It argued that this strategy may undermine rival offerings and entrench Meta’s position across adjacent digital services. In a statement, Meta confirmed cooperating fully with the Italian authorities.

The company defended the rollout of its AI features, stating that their inclusion in WhatsApp aimed to improve the user experience. ‘Offering free access to our AI features in WhatsApp gives millions of Italians the choice to use AI in a place they already know, trust and understand,’ a Meta spokesperson said via email.

The company maintains its approach, which benefits users by making advanced technology widely available through familiar platforms. The AGCM clarified that its inquiry is conducted in close cooperation with the European Commission’s relevant offices.

The cross-border collaboration reflects the growing scrutiny Meta faces from regulators across the EU over its market practices and the use of its extensive user base to promote new services.

If the authority finds Meta in breach of EU competition law, the company could face a fine of up to 10 percent of its global annual turnover. Under Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, abusing a dominant market position is prohibited, particularly if it affects trade between member states or restricts competition.

To gather evidence, AGCM officials inspected the premises of Meta’s Italian subsidiary, accompanied by Guardia di Finanza, the tax police’s special antitrust unit in Italy.

The inspections were part of preliminary investigative steps to assess the impact of Meta AI’s deployment within WhatsApp. Regulators fear that embedding AI assistants into dominant platforms could lead to unfair advantages in emerging AI markets.

By relying on its established user base and platform integration, Meta may effectively foreclose competition by making alternative AI services harder to access or less visible to consumers. Such a case would not be the first time Meta has faced regulatory scrutiny in Europe.

The company has been the subject of multiple investigations across the EU concerning data protection, content moderation, advertising practices, and market dominance. The current probe adds to a growing list of regulatory pressures facing the tech giant as it expands its AI capabilities.

The AGCM’s investigation comes amid broader EU efforts to ensure fair competition in digital markets. With the Digital Markets Act and AI Act emerging, regulators are becoming more proactive in addressing potential risks associated with integrating advanced technologies into consumer platforms.

As the investigation continues, Meta’s use of AI within WhatsApp will remain under close watch. The outcome could set an essential precedent for how dominant tech firms can release AI products within widely used communication tools.

Would you like to learn more about AI, tech, and digital diplomacy? If so, ask our Diplo chatbot!