ART Expert Provenance & Attestation Orchestrator for Perth Litigation Lawyers: Meet the March 2026 Expert Evidence Direction Without Scrambling

You’re running an Administrative Review Tribunal matter from Perth chambers. Your expert’s report landed yesterday. Somewhere in the methodology, the expert used a model — to summarise materials, to draft sections, perhaps to triangulate data. Under the ART’s Expert Evidence Practice Direction, you now need a clean record of what the expert did, what tools they used, and an attestation that travels with the report. The hearing block is in three weeks. The orchestrator is built so this doesn’t become the bottleneck.

The problem

The Administrative Review Tribunal’s Expert Evidence Practice Direction issued in March 2026 sharpened what litigation teams and their experts must do to surface AI assistance in expert reports — including provenance of inputs, identification of tools used, and an attestation by the expert that the opinions expressed are their own. For a Perth litigator running an ART matter from the other side of the country, the practical difficulties stack up fast:

• Experts often work in tools the legal team never sees (Excel macros, internal modelling stacks, drafting assistants embedded in their report templates).
• Provenance information is rarely captured in a structured form at the time the work is done — it gets reconstructed later, badly.
• Attestation wording needs to match the Practice Direction, not a generic precedent.
• The Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules require candour to the tribunal; an attestation that overstates or under-discloses what the expert actually did exposes both the expert and the instructing solicitor.

Most teams discover the gap at filing, then scramble to retrofit provenance into a report that’s already gone through three drafts.

What the ART Expert Provenance & Attestation Orchestrator does

The orchestrator is an agentic workflow that sits between the instructing solicitor and the expert from the moment the expert is retained. It captures, structures, and verifies the provenance and attestation artefacts that the March 2026 Practice Direction expects to see alongside an expert report in the ART.

The deliverable is an orchestrated package per expert engagement:

• A structured provenance ledger for each expert report — inputs received, tools used at each methodology step, model identifiers where AI assistance was applied, and human review points.
• An attestation drafted against the Practice Direction’s expectations and tailored to what the provenance ledger actually shows, ready for the expert’s signature.
• A version-aligned record so that if the expert produces a supplementary report, the provenance ledger and attestation update together rather than drifting apart.
• A pre-filing readiness check against the Practice Direction’s published expectations before the report leaves your office.

The orchestrator does not write the expert’s opinion. It captures the trail around it.

How it works

1. Engagement intake. When the expert is retained, the orchestrator generates a provenance template tied to the matter and the expert’s scope. The expert receives a structured prompt set rather than a vague request for a “methodology section”.
2. Methodology capture during the work. As the expert progresses, each materials bundle, tool invocation, and human-review checkpoint is logged into the ledger. The expert confirms or annotates each entry rather than reconstructing it from memory at the end.
3. Attestation drafting. Once the report is in near-final form, the orchestrator drafts the attestation against the actual contents of the provenance ledger, so the wording matches what the expert in fact did — not a boilerplate paragraph that may overstate or understate AI involvement.
4. Pre-filing readiness check. The full package (report, provenance ledger, attestation) is checked against the Practice Direction’s published expectations. Any gaps or mismatches are flagged for the instructing solicitor before lodgement.
5. Citation verification of the report itself. Where the expert report cites authorities or published sources, the same deterministic checker used in RuleCheck (the open-source verifier at github.com/andrefabre/rulecheck) runs over those citations so a hallucinated reference doesn’t slip through under cover of “expert evidence”.

Why this matters in Perth

A Perth-based litigation team running an ART matter is usually working with experts in multiple jurisdictions and time zones — interstate medical specialists, valuers, forensic accountants — coordinating across a two- or three-hour gap from the eastern seaboard registries. The administrative weight of capturing provenance after the fact, when the expert has already moved on to other work, falls disproportionately on the instructing solicitor. Doing it at engagement time, with a structured workflow rather than email reminders, is the practical answer.

The ART’s Practice Directions and other guidance for professionals and practitioners are published centrally and apply uniformly regardless of which registry hears the matter. A Perth solicitor cannot rely on local custom to soften the Direction’s expectations; the same standard travels with the file.

Sources

• Administrative Review Tribunal — Practice Directions and Other Guidance: https://www.art.gov.au/help-and-resources/professionals-and-practitioners/practice-directions-and-other-guidance
• RuleCheck (open-source citation verifier by Exegesis): https://github.com/andrefabre/rulecheck

Join the waitlist

The ART Expert Provenance & Attestation Orchestrator is a Tier 3 agentic workflow under development for Australian litigation teams. We’re scoping pricing (per-engagement, per-expert, or matter-licence) based on demand from Perth and interstate litigators running ART matters.

Join the waitlist — be the first to know when access opens for Perth litigation teams

What we hear from you will shape how the workflow handles interstate expert coordination and how the attestation drafting is calibrated against the March 2026 Direction.