Adverse Costs Exposure Advisor for Perth Boutique Firms: Map AI-Related Costs Risk Before You File

You run a six-lawyer firm in West Perth. A junior used an LLM to draft an expert-evidence outline for an Administrative Review Tribunal matter last week. The carriage partner signed it off in a hurry. The hearing is in three weeks. You’ve now read enough about adverse cost orders flowing from unverified AI output in other jurisdictions to be nervous — and you don’t have a structured way to ask: how exposed are we, on this matter, right now? The Adverse Costs Exposure Advisor is built for that question.

Why it matters now

The Administrative Review Tribunal’s practice directions for expert evidence set requirements for how expert material is prepared, disclosed and relied upon — including the basis on which opinions are formed. Where AI tools have been used in the preparation of evidence or submissions and that use has not been disclosed or verified, the practitioner — not the model — carries the consequence. The Federal Court’s General Practice Note on AI (GPN-AI) makes the same point in the federal civil context: practitioners are responsible for the accuracy of citations and authority references in any document filed, regardless of how those references were generated. The Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules (Rule 19 — candour to the court; Rule 17 — independence) reinforce the obligation. For a boutique firm, the practical risk is concentrated: one adverse costs order tied to AI misuse can be material to the year, and the firm doesn’t have a dedicated risk function to triage it in advance.

The 5-minute view

Adverse costs exposure from AI misuse arises where AI-generated content (citations, evidence summaries, expert outlines, submissions) is filed or relied upon without adequate verification or disclosure
The exposure sits with the practitioner and the firm, not the model vendor
ART practice directions on expert evidence, the Federal Court GPN-AI, and ASCR Rules 17 and 19 each create overlapping duties that an AI-touched document needs to satisfy
For boutique firms, the risk is rarely flagged early — by the time it surfaces, the document has been filed
The Adverse Costs Exposure Advisor reviews a matter at the pre-action or pre-filing stage and produces a structured assessment of where AI-related conduct could attract an adverse costs argument
The output is a written exposure assessment, not advice — it identifies the specific decisions (verification, disclosure, supervision) that reduce risk before the document leaves the firm
The advisor runs locally; matter material is not transmitted to external LLMs

What Exegesis is building

The Adverse Costs Exposure Advisor is part of the Exegesis Legal agent stack and shares the local-first, deterministic posture of RuleCheck. The advisor takes a matter brief (jurisdiction, document type, AI tools used, verification steps taken, disclosure made) and maps it against the obligations that bear on adverse costs exposure — ART expert-evidence requirements where the matter is before the Tribunal, GPN-AI where the matter is in the Federal Court, ASCR duties throughout. It produces a pre-action exposure assessment listing the points at which an adverse-costs argument could plausibly be made by an opponent or raised by the bench, with a recommended remediation step for each. It does not generate legal advice, does not produce submissions, and does not store the matter brief beyond the configured retention period.

The deliverable

A pre-action Adverse Costs Exposure Assessment for the specific matter
Per-issue mapping: the AI-related conduct, the rule or practice direction engaged, the exposure characterisation, and the remediation step
Coverage across ART expert-evidence direction, Federal Court GPN-AI, and ASCR Rules 17 and 19 as applicable
Markdown report suitable for archiving alongside the matter file and for partner sign-off
Optional audit log entry for firm governance
Delivered via the Exegesis Legal interface; processing typically completes within minutes of brief submission

CTA

Join the waitlist — be the first to know when access opens for Perth boutique firms

The Adverse Costs Exposure Advisor is on the Exegesis Legal roadmap and we’re scoping the right access model for small firms — per-matter, per-user, or firm-licence. Join the waitlist and we’ll let you know when it opens, and what we hear from boutique firms will shape how the small-firm tier actually works.

Sources

Administrative Review Tribunal — Practice Directions and Other Guidance (including expert evidence direction): https://www.art.gov.au/help-and-resources/professionals-and-practitioners/practice-directions-and-other-guidance
Federal Court of Australia — Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence Practice Note (GPN-AI): https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ai
Law Council of Australia — Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules: https://lawcouncil.au/policy-agenda/regulation-of-the-profession-and-ethics/australian-solicitors-conduct-rules

Exegesis capability references: