Dalippe Lalloo

As part of a controlled review, I tested 32 Irish personal-injury queries across ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot and Perplexity. The exercise was not intended as a league table. It asked a narrower question: when a member of the public seeks basic legal information, do the answers identify current Irish law and reliable sources?

The results were mixed. In one answer concerning fatal injury claims, an AI tool relied on the Fatal Injuries Act 1956. That Act was repealed by the Civil Liability Act 1961, and the present statutory framework for fatal injury actions is contained principally in Part IV of the 1961 Act.

The review also found references to the former Personal Injuries Assessment Board. Its statutory name changed to the Personal Injuries Resolution Board on 14 December 2023. The Personal Injuries Resolution Board Act 2022 also introduced a statutory mediation process, with the relevant provisions commencing in December 2023.

Limitation periods were sometimes reduced to the familiar phrase “two years from the accident”. That may be a useful warning, but it is not a complete statement of the law. For most personal-injury actions, the statutory period is two years from the date on which the cause of action accrued or the injured person’s date of knowledge, if later. In calculating the limitation period for a claim made to the Board, the period from the application until six months after the issue of an authorisation is disregarded. Other statutory rules and fact-specific exceptions may also apply.

These errors were not presented hesitantly. That is the difficulty. A confident, well-structured answer can conceal a weak source chain. A user may not distinguish between current legislation, an outdated article, a directory page and promotional material. In our review, some answers relied heavily on commercial webpages while omitting primary legislation and official sources.

The risks extend beyond incorrect names and dates. Solicitor advertising in Ireland is regulated. Current Law Society guidance confirms that, in advertisements concerning contentious business, expressions suggesting that legal services will be provided at no cost or reduced cost – including “no win, no fee” and “free first consultation” – are prohibited. AI tools may reproduce such wording from legacy webpages without identifying its regulatory context.

The answer is not to reject AI, but to use it with disciplined verification. For an Irish legal question, the first checks should include the Irish Statute Book or the Law Reform Commission’s Revised Acts, followed by the relevant public body and current professional guidance. Amendments, commencement orders and renamed institutions matter. A source that was accurate several years ago may now mislead.

Law firms also have a role. Clear, current and non-promotional explanations make reliable information easier to find. Old articles, duplicate directory profiles and outdated third-party content should be corrected or removed where possible. Online legal information should identify the governing legislation, link to authoritative sources and explain the limits of general guidance.

AI can be a useful starting point, but it is not a substitute for legal authority. The question should not merely be, “Does this answer sound convincing?” It should be, “What current Irish source supports each material proposition?”

Dalippe Lalloo is principal of Lalloo Solicitors in Dublin