Expert Evidence Identity Chain Orchestrator for Perth Litigation Lawyers: Prove Who Wrote Every Paragraph of the Expert Report

Your expert is a structural engineer in West Perth. She drafted an 80-page report on a construction defect matter, ran sections through an LLM to tighten language, asked a graduate to redraft the methodology section, and you sent the final PDF to the other side. At hearing, the cross-examiner asks: “Doctor, which paragraphs of this report did you personally write?” She hesitates. The opinion is hers — but the words might not be. The Expert Evidence Identity Chain Orchestrator is built so neither of you ever has to guess.

The problem

Expert reports are no longer single-author documents. A typical report in commercial litigation or administrative review now passes through the expert, one or more juniors, a solicitor’s redline, and — increasingly — a language model used somewhere along the way to summarise, restructure, or polish. The Administrative Review Tribunal’s Practice Directions set expectations for the conduct of expert evidence in proceedings before the ART, including the expert’s duty to the Tribunal and the requirement that opinion evidence be the expert’s own. When an expert cannot identify which parts of the report they personally authored, opined on, or verified — and which parts were drafted by a junior or generated by a model — the evidentiary weight of the report is at risk, and so is the expert’s credibility under cross-examination. The risk is not that AI was used. The risk is that no one can show who touched what.

What the Expert Evidence Identity Chain Orchestrator does

The Orchestrator produces an identity chain for every expert report: a paragraph-level record of who authored, edited, or generated each block of content, when, and using what tool. It treats the expert report as the artefact it is — a document with provenance — and reconstructs that provenance from the working files, version history, and tool logs your team already produces. The output is a sworn-statement-ready attribution map you can attach to the report, refer to in conference with counsel, and rely on when your expert is asked the question every expert is now asked.

How it works

1. Ingest the working set. You upload the draft history of the expert report — Word versions, tracked changes, comments, and any AI session transcripts or prompt logs the expert or junior used while drafting.
2. Reconstruct authorship per block. The Orchestrator segments the report into paragraphs and headings, then attributes each segment to a named human author, a named reviewer, or a flagged AI-assisted edit, using the version history and timestamps in the source files.
3. Flag attribution gaps. Any segment whose origin cannot be resolved from the source files is flagged for the expert to confirm in writing before the report is finalised — not after the cross-examiner finds it.
4. Produce the identity chain artefact. A structured report listing every paragraph of the final document, its author chain, the date of each touch, and the nature of any AI assistance (drafting, summarising, restructuring, language polish, none).
5. Archive alongside the matter. The identity chain is exported as a markdown record suitable for the matter file and for disclosure to the Tribunal or opposing party if attribution is later put in issue.

Why this matters in Perth

Perth litigation lawyers run a high volume of resources, construction, and administrative review matters where expert evidence — geotechnical, engineering, valuation, medical — is the case. Many of those matters end up in the Administrative Review Tribunal or the Federal Court, both of which now have explicit expectations about AI use and about the expert’s personal responsibility for their opinion. The Federal Court’s General Practice Note on AI (GPN-AI) puts the obligation to verify AI-assisted content on the practitioner filing it. The Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules require candour to the court, which extends to how an expert report was actually produced. Where an expert is based interstate and instructed remotely — common for Perth firms briefing Sydney or Melbourne specialists — the firm holding the brief is the one that wears the consequence of an attribution failure. The Orchestrator gives the instructing solicitor a defensible record of how the report was assembled, before it leaves the office.

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
• 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
• RuleCheck by Exegesis (open-source citation verifier): https://github.com/andrefabre/rulecheck

Join the waitlist

The Expert Evidence Identity Chain Orchestrator is in pre-release. We are scoping access tiers with Perth litigation teams running expert-heavy matters before the ART, the Federal Court, and the WA Supreme Court. Join the waitlist and we will let you know when access opens — and the structure you tell us you need will shape the tier you sit in.

Join the waitlist for the Expert Evidence Identity Chain Orchestrator