Madras High Court says ChatGPT cannot replace qualified lecturers

The Madras High Court has ruled that AI tools like ChatGPT cannot be equated with qualified teachers. A Division Bench stressed that lessons on integrity and morality must come from classroom settings. The decision came while overturning a single judge's order on student attendance.

A Division Bench of Justices S.M. Subramaniam and N. Senthilkumar made the observations on 18 June 2026. They set aside an order that had allowed three government law college students without the required 65% attendance to write examinations after special summer classes. The Bench allowed writ appeals filed by the Tamil Nadu Dr. Ambedkar Law University.

The judges stated that AI may approach human intelligence but cannot teach integrity and morality. They noted such lessons require a vibrant classroom. The ruling added that legal education connects students to legal and human rights and demands collective voices in class.

The Bench observed that online classes offer learning only when needed but cannot substitute physical classrooms permanently. Regular attendance builds self-discipline, punctuality and positive social behaviours, they said. The court emphasised fairness to students who meet attendance rules through merit.

関連記事

Illustration of lawyers in court using AI for fake citations in a Meta Facebook lawsuit case.
AIによって生成された画像

Facebook訴訟でAIによる架空の判例を引用した弁護士、制裁の可能性

AIによるレポート AIによって生成された画像

米国の控訴裁判所は、人工知能(AI)によって生成された架空の引用文を含む控訴理由書を提出した弁護士に対し、制裁を科す可能性があると警告した。この訴訟は、Facebook上の交際安全性に関するグループから批判的な投稿を削除するようMeta社に強制しようとしたものだった。

The Supreme Court AI Committee has released draft regulations that bar the use of artificial intelligence for determining judicial outcomes or profiling witnesses and parties in court cases.

AIによるレポート

Three educators blacklisted by India's Supreme Court over a controversial chapter in an NCERT Class 8 textbook have sought a hearing. The chapter covered corruption in the judiciary. Chief Justice Kant agreed to hear them.

A nine-judge Supreme Court bench stated on Wednesday that courts cannot hollow out religion in the name of reform and logic may not be the right tool to examine faith and belief systems. The remarks came on the second day of hearing a reference from the 2018 Sabarimala judgment. The Centre disagreed on courts deciding religious practices as superstition.

AIによるレポート

急速な技術進歩が進む中、AI研究者は倫理指針を積極的に適用すべきであるとする寄稿が発表されました。

このウェブサイトはCookieを使用します

サイトを改善するための分析にCookieを使用します。詳細については、プライバシーポリシーをお読みください。
拒否