
In this episode 268 of the podcast, I look at the recent Employment Appeal Tribunal decision in Hancox v Sutherland and Others [2026] EAT 139, in which a judge raised important concerns about the use of artificial intelligence in Employment Tribunal proceedings.
The case involved an employee who submitted a 300-page skeleton argument prepared using ChatGPT, prompting the judge to comment on the growing use of AI by individuals representing themselves.
I discuss what the judge said about the benefits and risks of AI, why lengthy AI-generated legal arguments can do more harm than good, and the importance of checking the accuracy of anything submitted to a Tribunal.
I also consider what this decision means for employees, employers and HR professionals, and why AI can be a useful tool but should not replace sound legal advice and judgment.
In this episode, we cover:
You can read the full judgment here: Hancox v Sutherland and Others [2026] EAT 139.
Three minimum requirements for anyone submitting AI-assisted documents:
If you would like a no obligation quote or call to discuss please do not hesitate to contact us on 01983 897003 or by email to [email protected]
Don't forget to subscribe to the podcast to stay informed on the latest in UK employment law. If you have questions or need tailored advice, feel free to get in touch – we are here to help.
Training for your Team
Would you like to arrange training for your team to reduce the risk of both unhappy employees and claims being made against you? Please get in touch for a no obligation discussion, we can offer training anywhere in the UK in person or delivered remotely via MS Teams.
Please drop me an email [email protected]