A rise in employment tribunal claims drafted or influenced using AI is reshaping how workplace disputes are brought, a leading south-west-based employment lawyer has said.
Outstanding cases rose by 26 per cent in a year to more than 60,000 open claims in September 2025, whilst the number of unresolved employment tribunal claims has surpassed half a million for the first time on record, according to HM Courts and Tribunals Service figures.
The increase in AI-assisted claims comes as the employment tribunal system is already facing unprecedented strain.
Roy Magara, Solicitor Advocate and founder of Magara Law, which has offices in Bicester, London, Banbury and Reading, said his firm is increasingly seeing cases prepared with the help of AI, especially from litigants in person who would previously have struggled to navigate the system.
He said: “AI is undeniably changing access to justice in the employment tribunal system.
“For many people who felt unable to pursue a claim, AI has opened the door to justice at scale that simply didn’t exist a few years ago.
“Litigants in person are arriving better prepared, more confident, and more willing to challenge decisions they would once have walked away from.”
However, he said that improved access hasn’t translated into faster or more efficient hearings, rather the opposite.
Tribunal waiting times have continued to rise, with the average wait for a standard unfair dismissal claim now stretching beyond a year, up from 30 weeks a decade ago, according to the Ministry of Justice.
As a result, tribunals are spending more time working out what matters in each case, pushing hearings longer and placing added pressure on tribunal resources.
“The growing backlog of claims is exposing deep structural weaknesses in an already under-resourced tribunal system,” Roy added.
“A process can be legally fair on paper, but if it is consistently slow, justice becomes less effective in practice.”
Delays carry consequences on both sides, as employers face prolonged management time, disclosure burdens and reputational risk, while employees experience extended stress, financial insecurity and cases weakening as evidence degrades over time.
Alongside these pressures, the employment firm said it’s seeing increasing risks linked to over-reliance on AI during case preparation.
Roy said: “It’s important to be clear that AI can assist preparation, but it is not a substitute for legal advice or professional judgment.
“Over-reliance can be actively damaging to a case.
“Whilst AI is reshaping the employment disputes landscape, it does not remove the need for legal expertise.”
Pressure on the system is set to intensify further in 2026, when the Employment Rights Bill comes into force.
Government economic analysis estimates that the reforms could increase cases by 17%, resulting in an additional 6,900 more employment tribunal claims and around 1,300 additional cases requiring judicial time such as full hearings.
“In 2026, tribunals must impose a stronger emphasis on proportionality, assertive case management and greater pressure on parties to focus on the issues that actually determine the outcome, rather than expansive or scattergun pleadings,” Roy concluded.
“AI will become a normal feature of case preparation, but its use will attract far greater scrutiny and questions around accuracy, confidentiality and the reliability of evidence.”
