Ermos AI for drafting legal submissions.

Submissions are structured argument over known material: the evidence, the authorities, the chronology, your firm's own way of putting a case. That makes them strong territory for AI drafting support, and also the workflow where the profession's guardrails are most explicit. Both halves belong on this page.

The guardrails first

Australian courts have issued practice notes on AI in litigation, and some restrict or require disclosure of AI use in preparing evidence and court documents; the regulators' joint statement is equally direct about confidential material in public AI tools. Two consequences follow. Whatever tool a firm uses, the lawyer owns every word filed, verifies every authority, and complies with the practice notes of the court they are before. And the drafting should happen somewhere client material is not being disclosed to a third party, which is the problem an on-premise unit removes outright. Our privilege and AI guide covers the current guidance.

How it works on the unit

Where it earns its place

The unit is at its best on the parts that consume time without deciding cases: factual background from a settled chronology, first-pass structure, consistency across a long document, finding where the evidence supports a proposition. The judgement stays where the practice notes require it to stay.

Common questions