Source: Ross Martin

This report details a case before the UK's Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) where an appeal related to the Self-Employment Income Support Scheme (SEISS) was dismissed, with the tribunal making specific, critical comments about the appellant's misuse of artificial intelligence. The appellant, who was self-represented, submitted legal arguments that were evidently generated by an AI tool. The tribunal found these submissions to be "unfocused, irrelevant, and containing incorrect legal assertions."

The judgment serves as a significant warning to taxpayers and their advisors about the dangers of relying on generative AI for legal and tax-related arguments without proper human oversight and expertise. The tribunal noted that the AI-generated content failed to grasp the specific legal tests and factual nuances of the case, leading to a submission that was ultimately unhelpful and unpersuasive. This case underscores the principle that while AI can be a tool, it cannot replace the professional judgment and tailored analysis required to successfully argue a case before a court or tribunal.