Date Published - 30 October 2025
1. Purpose of This Guidance
The purpose of this document is to provide guidance to all parties who come before the Workplace Relations Commission (WRC) who may use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to prepare written submissions or documents for use as evidence in their case.
AI tools can be helpful in organising thoughts, improving grammar, or generating drafts. However, they can also produce inaccurate or misleading information, especially when it comes to Irish employment and equality law. This guidance outlines briefly how to use such tools responsibly at the WRC and what risks to be aware of.
2. What Are AI Tools?
AI tools include any software or online service that can generate text or assist in writing, such as:
- ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Microsoft Copilot, etc
- AI writing assistants or grammar tools
- AI-based legal research websites
These tools may help you draft text or explain concepts, but they should not be relied upon as legal advice. You should always check that you are relying on the most up-to-date law.
3. You Are Responsible for What You Submit
The WRC treats all submissions as your own, even if you used an AI tool to help prepare them.
That means:
- You must take full responsibility for the content.
- If any legal information is incorrect or misleading, it may negatively affect your case.
- You may be asked to explain your submission or provide clarification.
The WRC’s approach to the use of AI by litigants was recently summarised by an Adjudication Officer:
“While I’m not particularly concerned about whether the Complainant used AI or not I am clear that parties making submissions to the WRC have an obligation to ensure that their submissions are relevant and accurate and do not set out to mislead either the other party or the Adjudication Officer.”[1]
In dismissing that complaint, the Adjudication Officer criticised the wasting of time on “citations that were not relevant, mis-quoted and in many instances, non-existent”.[2]
4. Risks of Relying on AI Tools
While AI can be useful, please note the following risks:
- Inaccurate legal advice: AI tools are not trained specifically on Irish employment and equality law or WRC procedures.
- Fictional or incorrect references: AI tools may create case law, legislation, or WRC decisions that do not exist. This is called “AI hallucination”.
- Overconfidence in AI-generated arguments: AI-generated submissions may sound confident but may not reflect Irish legal realities.
- Data privacy concerns: Free online tools may store or use personal data or commercially sensitive information you type into them.
5. Best Practices When Using AI
If you use an AI tool in preparation for a WRC hearing, you should:
- Double-check all legal content: Make sure case names, legislation, and principles are real, relevant, and from Irish law.
- Understand what you are submitting: Do not include material you do not fully understand or cannot explain if questioned or cross examined in the hearing.
- Avoid including sensitive personal data: particularly in public AI tools (e.g. names, PPS numbers, health details).
- Do not rely on AI for legal strategy or outcomes: AI cannot assess the strengths or weaknesses of your specific case.
6. Optional Disclosure of AI Use
You may, let the WRC know that you used AI to assist you, especially if parts of your submission were generated with its help. For example, you may wish to include a statement in your submission like this:
“Parts of this submission were drafted using an AI writing tool. I have reviewed and confirmed the accuracy of all content.”
This disclosure statement is optional but promotes transparency and helps the WRC understand how your submission was prepared.
7. Consequences of Misuse
Submissions containing incorrect or misleading information, whether produced by AI or otherwise, may:
- Undermine your arguments
- Delay the hearing of your case
- Require you to make corrections or clarifications
- In serious cases, could affect how your credibility is viewed
Ultimately, the decision to accept submissions or other material rests with the Adjudication Officer who will assess whether the material is admissible and relevant to your case. As Judge Simons said in the High Court, “an Adjudication Officer is entitled to ensure that a hearing progresses expeditiously by asking parties to confine themselves to the relevant issues”[3] An Adjudication Officer may be disinclined to admit material that is superfluous, incorrect or misleading as a result of being generated by AI.
8. Where to Get Reliable Support
To help familiarise yourself with Irish employment and equality law, the WRC has published a list of authorities which are most commonly cited in WRC proceedings. That list can be found here with the full cases available to help litigants.
If you include references to the cases on this list in your submission, you do not need to provide separate copies of them with your submission. If you are citing cases not included on the WRC’s list of authorities, please provide copies of the decisions or hyperlinks to them.
9. Final Note
The WRC encourages fair, efficient, and respectful resolution of workplace disputes and equality claims. While AI can support your preparation, it is not a substitute for understanding your case or the law that applies. Please use these tools responsibly, transparently and seek reliable advice if needed.
The following guidelines explain the rules of procedures at a WRC hearing more generally: WRC Procedures for All Cases, 2024.
The WRC is committed to identifying ethical, responsible and meaningful use of AI capabilities. We will be transparent as we explore, adopt and integrate AI technology to benefit staff and external stakeholders. To demonstrate this commitment and how AI can be used usefully with transparency and responsibility, parts of this guidance were drafted using AI to assist with layout and formatting.
Disclaimer: General Nature of AI Usage Guidance
This policy provides general guidance to assist lay litigants in understanding the potential uses and limitations of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the WRC context. It is not intended to offer specialised, technical, or expert advice on the development, deployment, or regulation of AI technologies.
[1] Oliveira v. Ryanair DAC ADJ-00055225.
[2] Oliveira v. Ryanair DAC ADJ-00055225.
[3] Erdogan v. Workplace Relations Commission [2021] IEHC 348.