You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

December 3, 2025

Thailand Civil Court Issues Rules on AI-Generated Court Filings

Subscribe to Updates

Thailand’s Civil Court has issued a regulation targeting the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in the preparation of pleadings and other documents submitted to the court. Effective November 17, 2025, the regulation aligns with September 2025 guidance from the president of the Supreme Court, and aims to safeguard accuracy, transparency, and public confidence in civil adjudication.

The regulation applies to all parties submitting pleadings or any documents to the Civil Court that are prepared using AI tools or contain AI-generated content. It subjects AI used for these purposes to strict requirements on verification, disclosure, and accountability.

Core Obligations

The regulation imposes four principal obligations:

  • Lawyers who use AI remain subject to duties of honesty, responsibility to the court, professional standards, and legal ethics, including the duty to assess the appropriateness of the AI tool for the work.
  • Parties and lawyers must verify the accuracy and completeness of all facts, legal provisions, and citations in AI-generated content before submission.
  • Parties and lawyers must disclose to the court any AI-generated content by clearly marking the beginning and end of the AI-generated portion with prescribed statements (see below). Additionally, a certification confirming the use of AI must be provided at the end of the pleading or document, stating that AI was used for certain portions and that the party has reviewed and certifies the accuracy of factual and legal content.
  • Parties and lawyers bear the same full legal and ethical responsibility for AI-generated content as they do for personally authored documents; they cannot evade responsibility or avoid liability by citing AI-related errors. Likewise, parties must ensure that any AI-generated content is truthful, accurate, and unbiased.

Prescribed Disclosure Language

Each instance of AI-generated content must be preceded by the statement “[The following content was prepared using artificial intelligence]” and must end with “[End of content prepared using artificial intelligence].”

In addition, any filing that includes AI-generated content must include the following certification at the end of the document: “Certain portions of this [type of document] were prepared using artificial intelligence. I have reviewed and certify the accuracy of the facts and the law prior to submission to the court.”

Enforcement and Compliance Considerations

Noncompliance may be reported by a court officer or judge to superiors for further orders and may constitute disorderly conduct within court precincts under the Civil Procedure Code. In practical terms, counsel should anticipate potential adverse procedural measures, reputational consequences, and other court-ordered remedies for violations.

It is important for lawyers to implement AI-use protocols that align with the regulation’s requirements. This includes selecting AI tools solely as aids to human drafting, ensuring that every AI-generated output undergoes thorough human review for accuracy of facts, laws, and citations, inserting the exact disclosure statements around each AI-generated section, and adding the mandated end-of-document certification.

Lawyers must also apply litigation quality controls—such as primary-source verification, adversarial checks for hallucinations or bias, and chronological and citation audits—before filing. For mixed-origin documents, lawyers must maintain internal versions that identify which sections are AI-assisted to avoid disclosure gaps.

Finally, firms must update professional responsibility guidance and training to reinforce that lawyers remain wholly accountable for AI-assisted content.

Key Takeaways

The Civil Court’s regulation recognizes the legitimate role of AI in modern litigation while requiring human oversight, explicit transparency, and uncompromised professional responsibility. Legal practitioners and parties may continue leveraging AI’s efficiencies, provided they embed rigorous review processes and the mandated disclosures into the filing workflows.

The regulation is also the latest in a broader effort by the Thai courts to address the implications of AI use across the judiciary. Aside from the regulation, the president of the Supreme Court also issued guidance in September 2025 promoting ethical and cautious use of AI technologies in court operations.

Related Professionals

Industries

Technology

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

February 20, 2025
Vietnam’s Decree No. 147/2024/ND-CP on the management, provision, and use of internet services and online information (Decree 147) was issued on November 9, 2024, and came into effect on December 25, 2024. Decree 147 represents a more stringently regulated digital landscape in Vietnam, creating challenges not only for offshore service providers offering cross-border services but also for onshore providers. As these new regulations impose stricter requirements, particularly in areas like content control, user authentication, data storage, and service license/notification, companies will need to adapt quickly to maintain compliance and minimize legal risks. The following are some of the key topics covered by Decree 147. [Note: Shortly after the issuance of Decree 147, Vietnam began a government restructuring process, with the aim of streamlining the government by consolidating and eliminating various ministries and agencies. Thus, the decree’s references to authorities such as the Authority of Broadcasting and Electronic Information (ABEI) and the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC) are subject to change.] 1. Cross-Border Information Provision Cross-border information provision is defined broadly as the provision by overseas organizations and individuals of information and online information content services for service users in Vietnam to access or use. This wide-ranging definition encompasses various types of cross-border services, including social network services, online game services, and app store services. However, cross-border provision of online game services remains prohibited under Decree 147 (see further details below). Offshore providers of services on a cross-border basis who lease data storage in Vietnam or meet a threshold of 100,000 or more total visits per month from Vietnam for six consecutive months (“regulated cross-border providers”) must adhere to stricter requirements. Specifically, they are required to, among other requirements: Notify the relevant authority of their contact information, including the location of the main server providing the service, within 60
Read More
February 17, 2025
Thailand’s draft Emergency Decree on Technology Crimes Suppression, which we covered in a client alert in January 2025 primarily addressed to telecom operators and financial institutions, is expected to have significant implications for a wide range of business operators.  The draft emergency decree has already been approved by the cabinet but may undergo further developments as it continues in the legislative process. In this article, we will highlight the material impacts of the draft emergency decree on overseas and local fintech operators. Expanded Definition of “Technology Crimes” The definition of “technology crimes” now includes the following acts of forgery or alteration: Forging or altering the identity of individuals and biometric characteristics by utilizing computer or communication systems or other electronic means to commit offenses. Forging or altering symbols, trademarks, or seals of groups (e.g., foundations, community enterprises) or juristic persons, including acts by juristic persons using individuals or juristic persons as nominal directors or shareholders, regardless of whether such individuals or legal juristic persons reside in Thailand. Forging or altering digital or online platforms, regardless of the platform’s location or legal status. Individuals who conspire, utilize, assist, or support the commission of these offenses will face the same penalties as the principal offender. Business Operator Definition The scope of “business operators” is now expanded to cover various fintech and digital asset operators beyond those under the Payment Systems Act (PSA). The draft emergency decree now includes the following operators, whether they are legally authorized or not: Business operators under the PSA and business operators who operate “as if” they are payment system operators Business operators under the Royal Decree on Digital Asset Businesses or business operators who operate “as if” they are digital asset business operators. Foreign exchange business operators. Disclosure and Exchange of Information Business operators must disclose
Read More
February 7, 2025
Vietnam’s political system is currently undergoing a significant reorganization to streamline government operations and improve efficiency. In this regard, Plan 141/KH-BCDTKNQ18, issued on December 6, 2024, provided guidelines on the restructuring of existing ministries, ministerial-level agencies, and government-affiliated agencies. Accordingly, the number of ministries is being reduced from 18 to 14 through mergers and consolidations and the establishment of a new Ministry of Ethnic and Religious Affairs. The number of ministerial-level agencies is being reduced to three, and government-affiliated agencies to five. Similar streamlining is happening at provincial levels. The newly consolidated state agencies will assume all functions, rights, and responsibilities of the merged entities, and will continue handling all ongoing matters previously handled by the former agencies. Some examples of these changes include the following: The Ministry of Science and Technology (MOST) will oversee telecommunications, IT applications, cybersecurity, e-transactions, and national digital transformation, which had previously been managed by the Ministry of Information and Communications (MIC). MOST will also be responsible for issuing licenses related to these areas, such as licenses for G1 online game services and telecommunication services. The Ministry of Culture, Sports, and Tourism will assume the responsibility of press management, previously under the MIC. The Ministry of Finance will assume state management functions related to investment, previously handled by the Ministry of Planning and Investment. Provincial Departments of Finance will issue Investment Registration Certificates and Enterprise Registration Certificates, a responsibility previously held by the Departments of Planning and Investment. The Ministry of Home Affairs will oversee labor and employment matters. Provincial Departments of Home Affairs will be authorized to issue work permits and will be the designated authorities for companies to register their internal labor regulations. Advantages for Businesses The restructuring aims to simplify regulations and expedite licensing processes. By reducing the number of agencies
Read More
February 6, 2025
The Thai government has proposed amendments to the Gambling Act B.E. 2478 (1935), aiming to address the growing influence of online gambling activities and strengthen regulatory oversight. These amendments, if enacted, would introduce significant changes, particularly concerning online gambling operators, participants, and related advertising activities. The draft amendment is currently in the public hearing process, which is scheduled to conclude on February 14, 2025. Key highlights of the proposed amendments are discussed below. Online Gambling In the proposed amendment, “online gambling” refers to gambling via a computer system or electronic system either through the internet or through remote communication. Organizing, participating in, or engaging in any type of online gambling is prohibited unless authorized by the competent authority. This opens the door for the authorization of casino-style online gambling in Thailand. However, the proposed amendment also imposes strict penalties on both operators and gamblers engaging in unauthorized online gambling: Anyone who organizes unauthorized online gambling is subject to imprisonment for 7–12 years. This penalty also applies to those responsible for managing electronic systems or tools used to facilitate gambling, as well as anyone involved in advertising, promoting, or deceiving others, either directly or indirectly, to engage in online gambling without proper authorization. Any person who engages in unauthorized online gambling is subject to imprisonment for 1–3 years. Dealers, supervisors of gambling or gambling activities, runners conveying wagers or other betting information, and owners of premises who knowingly permit such unauthorized activities are subject to imprisonment for 5–7 years. Penalties for Unauthorized Offline Gambling Operators The proposed amendment revokes the previous penalties under the Gambling Act and proposes stronger penalties. Both the original penalties and the proposed replacements depend on the type of gambling activity under the law, which classifies gambling activities into two types—list A and list B. List
Read More