Part of the AI Regulation News hub.
Correction, October 1, 2026. This article has been corrected to clarify the direction's status, scope, disclosure, verification, permission requirements and sanctions. Claims about coverage, economic effects and regional comparisons have been removed. Quotations and the account of which documents we checked have been corrected, and the full headline has been restored in the article metadata.
Turks and Caicos Chief Justice issues a generative AI practice direction covering all courts
The direction commenced on 4 August 2025 and sets requirements for generative AI use in court proceedings across the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Requirements: The direction commenced on 4 August 2025. Its requirements use "shall", and paragraph 12 sets out what the Court may do when an attorney does not comply.
Who this affects: Court users include attorneys, judicial and legal researchers, court clerks, legal officers and advisors, and self-represented litigants. Separate provisions address judicial officers and experts.
Issue date: Assented to 14 July 2025. Commenced 4 August 2025.
What changed: GenAI use in a filed document must be acknowledged, GenAI-generated legal references must be independently verified, using GenAI to draft any part of an expert report requires prior leave, and privileged material may not go into a public chatbot.
Coverage: This direction applies throughout the territory's courts. The scope expressly includes closed-source and open-source GenAI models.
Primary sources: Practice Direction 1 of 2025 (TCILII, full text) · Practice Direction 1 of 2025 (PDF)
- Instrument (EN)
- Guide to the Use of Generative AI in Court Proceedings, Practice Direction 1 of 2025
- Authority
- The Chief Justice, issued under section 17 of the Supreme Court Act and section 3 of the Chief Justice (Responsibilities) Act, with the approval of the President of the Court of Appeal
- Jurisdiction
- Turks and Caicos Islands
- Status
- Commenced on 4 August 2025.
- Legal requirements
- The practice direction uses "shall" for its requirements. Paragraph 12 lists three responses the Court may take against an attorney who fails to comply.
- Scope
- All proceedings in all courts in the Turks and Caicos Islands, and both closed-source and open-source GenAI models
- Issue date / next deadline
- Assented 14 July 2025; commenced 4 August 2025. The direction does not give a separate compliance deadline or review date.
- Primary work
- Supreme Court Ordinance
- Primary source
- https://tcilii.org/akn/tc/act/practice-direction/2025/1/eng@2025-08-04
Commencement and publication dates
Practice Direction 1 of 2025 was assented to on 14 July 2025 and commenced on 4 August 2025. This article covers the version dated 4 August 2025.
The direction remains in force until varied, replaced or revoked by the Chief Justice, according to paragraph 1.
The @2025-08-04 tag in the TCILII URL identifies the version date. Paragraph 1 gives the commencement date of 4 August 2025. The publication block in the web version and on page one of the PDF records assent on 14 July 2025.
All courts and both types of GenAI model
Paragraph 3 applies the direction to "all proceedings in all courts in the Turks and Caicos Islands" and "both closed-source and open-source GenAI models".
This direction applies throughout the territory's courts. The scope expressly includes closed-source and open-source GenAI models.
Paragraph 2 defines "court users" to include attorneys, judicial and legal researchers, court clerks, legal officers and advisors, and self-represented litigants. Paragraph 4 addresses judicial officers, and paragraph 11 addresses expert reports.
Paragraph 11(4) requires parties and attorneys who instruct experts to bring the requirements of this Practice Direction to the attention of the expert.
Disclosure and a Certificate of Use are required
Paragraph 7(5) requires a document produced using GenAI to disclose that use, regardless of the amount of AI involvement.
Paragraph 10(2) requires authors who use GenAI to prepare written submissions or skeleton arguments to disclose that use in the body of the document. Paragraphs 10(3) and 13(2) describe optional cover sheets or tick-box disclosures.
Paragraph 13(1) also requires a Certificate of Use. A judicial officer, attorney or unrepresented litigant who uses GenAI to produce a judgment or ruling, or a document in whole or in part for judicial proceedings, shall acknowledge it by including a Certificate of Use in the form at Appendix B. Appendix B is one sentence with two blanks, naming the tool and version and stating that all legal authorities have been verified.
The certificate names the GenAI tool and version used and confirms verification of all legal authorities.
Verification duties for court users and judicial officers
Verification requirements appear in several provisions. Paragraph 5(2) requires that legal research generated shall be verified against trusted legal databases and resources, for accuracy and against known or perceived biases. Paragraph 7(7) requires information generated by GenAI to be verified from official sources such as TCILII, court websites, or recognised legal databases.
Paragraph 10(2) sets out three checks. The author must verify that all citations, legal and academic authority and case law and legislative references (a) exist, (b) are accurate, and (c) are relevant to the proceedings. Existence is the first of three express checks. Paragraph 2 defines "hallucination" for the instrument and expressly includes false citations and fabricated legislative, case or other references.
For unrepresented litigants the duty is personal under paragraph 6(1), and paragraph 6(2) then puts a duty on the court to ascertain that the required verification has been done.
The verification requirements for attorneys and court users use "shall". Paragraph 4(2) encourages judicial officers to verify GenAI-generated references cited in judgments where practicable. Paragraph 4(1)(b) also commits the Court to verifying AI-generated outputs used in processing judicial decisions.
Privilege, prohibited uses, and what the Court may do
Paragraph 8(2) says court users shall not input privileged or sensitive information into unsecured AI platforms, and gives the reason: prompts and interactions may be added automatically to the model database and used to answer other users unless that is disabled. Paragraph 8(3) states that sensitive material and information to which professional privilege may attach may not be inputted by court users in a public chatbot. Paragraph 8(4) encourages enterprise-grade platforms, a term paragraph 2 defines by naming Westlaw Precision AI and Lexis AI as examples. Paragraph 8(5) allows the Judiciary to publish a list of recognised or approved AI tools. We have not confirmed whether such a list has been published.
Paragraphs 7 and 11 restrict GenAI use in evidence and expert reports. Under paragraph 7(6), GenAI shall not be used in affidavits, witness statements or other evidentiary materials, which shall be produced from personal recollection. Under paragraph 11(1), GenAI shall not be used to draft or prepare the content of an expert report, or any part of one, without prior leave of the Court. Paragraph 9 allows an affidavit deponent to seek leave to annex a document or exhibit generated by GenAI. Paragraph 9 lists requirements for annexure applications, including the version used. Paragraph 11(2) separately lists requirements for expert-report applications and does not expressly require a version.
Paragraph 12 sets out sanctions. It provides that where an attorney using GenAI for a document in judicial proceedings fails to acknowledge that use or fails to verify the cited sources of law, the Court may (a) strike out submissions, (b) refuse to accept improperly verified or undisclosed documents, and (c) impose costs for non-compliance with this Practice Direction.
The three sanctions are discretionary. Paragraph 12 addresses attorneys; unrepresented litigants and experts have duties elsewhere in the direction. The direction does not specify a fixed monetary penalty, suspension, referral to the Bar Council or contempt proceedings.
Territorial scope
The direction sets requirements for court proceedings in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
Paragraph 3 covers all proceedings in all courts in the Turks and Caicos Islands.
The direction also applies to both closed-source and open-source GenAI models.
Publication notes and unconfirmed details
The PDF is the version dated 4 August 2025 and warns that there may have been updates since the file was created. We have not confirmed whether the direction has since been amended or revoked.
TCILII hosts a Laws.Africa reproduction whose front matter says legislation is reproduced as originally printed, with minor typographical errors corrected. We have not confirmed its wording against the original Government Gazette scan, the legal basis cited in the direction against the underlying Acts and Ordinance, or how its requirements compare with instruments from the Caribbean Court of Justice, Jamaica, Bahamas, Belize or Trinidad and Tobago. We have not confirmed whether any judgment has applied this Practice Direction.
Appendix A lists drafting summaries as "Permitted with issue". We have not confirmed what that phrase means.
If you file in the Turks and Caicos Islands, the disclosure obligation is not court-specific and not tool-specific: paragraph 3 reaches all proceedings in all courts and both open-source and closed-source models. Put the GenAI acknowledgment in the body of the submission. Include the Appendix B Certificate of Use when paragraph 13(1) applies. Verify that every authority exists before you file it, keep privileged material out of public chatbots, and get leave before any part of an expert report is drafted with AI.
Source File
https://tcilii.org/akn/tc/act/practice-direction/2025/1/eng@2025-08-04
TCILII provides the text and a downloadable PDF of Practice Direction 1 of 2025. Paragraph 1 gives the commencement date, paragraph 3 sets the scope, and paragraph 12 lists the three discretionary court responses.
"all proceedings in all courts in the Turks and Caicos Islands" ยท Practice Direction 1 of 2025, paragraph 3, commenced 4 August 2025
FAQ
Does the Turks and Caicos practice direction require me to disclose that I used AI?
Yes. Paragraph 7(5) states that a document produced using GenAI shall disclose that GenAI was used, and paragraph 10(2) adds that where GenAI has been used for a written submission or skeleton argument the author shall indicate that in the body of the document. Paragraph 13(1) requires a Certificate of Use in the Appendix B form. The cover sheet and tick-box mechanisms in paragraphs 10(3) and 13(2) are described as optional.
Which courts does it cover?
Paragraph 3 applies it to all proceedings in all courts in the Turks and Caicos Islands, and to both closed-source and open-source GenAI models.
What happens if an attorney does not comply?
Paragraph 12 provides that where an attorney fails to acknowledge the use of GenAI or fails to verify the sources of law cited, the Court may strike out submissions, refuse to accept improperly verified or undisclosed documents, and impose costs for non-compliance. All three are discretionary and the paragraph is addressed to attorneys. The direction does not specify a fine, suspension or referral mechanism.
Can I put client documents into ChatGPT to prepare a filing?
The instrument says no for privileged or sensitive material. Paragraph 8(2) says court users shall not input privileged or sensitive information into unsecured AI platforms, and paragraph 8(3) says material to which professional privilege may attach may not be inputted in a public chatbot. Paragraph 8(4) encourages enterprise-grade platforms with secure data environments, which paragraph 2 defines by example.
Related briefings
Sponsored Training
Practical AI training for regulated professionals, built around verification, documentation and a defensible process. See the courses.