Key points
- Permission is assessment-specific: approval for one AI function does not authorise every other function.
- If the brief is silent or unclear, pause and obtain formal clarification before using the tool.
- An acknowledgement may be required, but disclosure cannot make an unauthorised use acceptable.
- AI-suggested authorities and citations are not sources: independently locate and read authentic materials.
Can I use ChatGPT in my law dissertation? Start with the brief
A dissertation is assessed work, so broad online advice about AI is not enough. Start with the dissertation or assessment brief, then the module or programme guidance, and then the current institutional academic-integrity policy. Those documents may set different limits for planning, drafting, research activity, declarations and collaboration. Sector resources recognise that generative AI raises assessment and academic-standards questions, but they do not create one national permission rule for every student.[5]
Institutional guidance illustrates why this order matters. Some guidance distinguishes learning-oriented activity from assessment and makes the assessment-level instruction decisive; other guidance requires specific prior authorisation for AI in assessment. These are examples of variation, not rules that govern your degree.[1] [4] If the applicable documents do not clearly permit your intended use, do not use it for the dissertation until you have clarification in writing.
- Identify whether the instruction prohibits, permits or limits AI.
- Read the exact activity allowed, not just the name of the tool.
- Check any record, acknowledgement, declaration or citation requirement.
Sources[1] Academic integrity guidance[4] Academic integrity guidance[5] Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education
What does ‘permitted’ mean for an assessed dissertation?
Permission should be read narrowly and in context. A statement allowing one limited function does not necessarily allow generated prose, a changed chapter structure, paraphrase, legal analysis, source selection or citation generation. The relevant question is not simply whether you used AI, but whether this particular use is permitted for this dissertation and whether it displaces work the assessment is intended to show.[1] [2]
Use this short decision sequence before entering any dissertation material into a tool. It is deliberately cautious: when the answer is unclear, clarification from your own institution is the appropriate next step, rather than an assumption based on a different course or university.
- Is this for the assessed dissertation? If not, remain critical of any general learning output; if it is, continue.
- Does the brief expressly permit this particular use? If no or unclear, stop and ask for clarification.
- Will an output appear in, shape or substantially alter the submission? Use it only within the stated limits and follow every required disclosure instruction.
- Could you evidence your own reading, reasoning and drafting without the tool? If not, do not proceed.
Sources[1] Academic integrity guidance[2] Academic Skills Kit
Can AI help with ideas, reading or a study plan?
In some settings, AI may be discussed as a learning tool for considering a concept, discussing study habits or identifying potential reading. That is not a blanket green light for a dissertation. Whether even these learning-oriented activities are allowed depends on the brief and applicable rules for the module. The student remains responsible for the intellectual work and for testing information rather than accepting an output because it sounds plausible.[1] [6]
A suggested book, article, case or statute is not a reading list and is never an authority merely because a tool produced it. Independently locate and read the original, authentic material, then make your own judgment about relevance and meaning. If the brief does not permit AI-assisted discovery, do not use it for that purpose at all. Do not use AI as a substitute for the research, reading and evaluative skills the dissertation is assessing.[6]
- Treat any suggestion as unverified until you have independently checked the original source.
- Do not rely on an AI summary in place of reading the authority itself.
- Keep the dissertation brief in view before treating a study activity as permitted.
Sources[1] Academic integrity guidance[6] Academic Skills Kit
When do AI-generated text, alterations and citations create a risk?
The risk is not confined to copying a complete answer. Asking AI to generate text, rewrite, paraphrase, expand, compress or reorganise a passage can affect authorship and may alter the work beyond what is permitted. The same concern can arise where an AI tool changes language, flow, tone or expression so extensively that the submitted work no longer represents the student’s own effort. Starting with your own prompt does not remove that question.[1] [2]
Do not rely on AI to generate legal authorities, citations, quotations, pinpoints, summaries of judgments or propositions of law for an assessed dissertation. Guidance warns that AI material may be inaccurate, fabricated or misleading about its sources. A reference list should not contain material you have not personally consulted, and an acknowledgement does not cure a use that was never authorised.[4] [6]
- Do not present generated legal analysis or expression as your own work.
- Do not treat an AI-produced citation, quote or pinpoint as verified.
- Read the original authentic authority before deciding whether to rely on it.
Sources[1] Academic integrity guidance[2] Academic Skills Kit[4] Academic integrity guidance[6] Academic Skills Kit
Do I need to declare AI use in my dissertation?
Possibly, but the required format is set by the dissertation brief and applicable local rules. Guidance on acknowledgement explains that a required statement may need to identify the tool, why and how it was used and, where specified, prompts, outputs or changes made. Follow the prescribed format rather than copying a generic declaration. A truthful record supports accurate disclosure; it does not turn a prohibited use into a permitted one.[3]
Make a factual record while you can still remember the detail. Do not upload confidential feedback, personal data, client information, unpublished course materials or dissertation draft text to a public AI tool unless your institution expressly approves this and the tool's terms and privacy arrangements permit it. This is a prudent safeguard, not an assumption that every tool handles data in the same way.
- Note the tool and version or access route, if known, and the date used.
- Record the permitted purpose, what was entered and what was returned.
- Record the independent action you took afterwards and the required disclosure format.
Sources[3] Academic Skills Kit
What legitimate dissertation support can I use instead?
If you need to think through a brief or organise an independent plan, policy-aware one-to-one planning support can focus on broad concepts, a student-created outline, project planning and questions to take back to your institution. It should protect, rather than replace, the learning and authorship that assessment is designed to evidence. For wider boundaries around legitimate tutoring, see the related academic-integrity guidance.
The Law Tutors does not write, rewrite, substantially edit, proofread, conduct research, fact-check, supply sources or legal authorities, check citations, paraphrase, alter draft text, prepare declarations or complete any assessed work. If you would like to discuss your brief or plan without crossing those boundaries, explore policy-aware planning support through the law dissertation tutoring page, then use the enquiry route only if it feels appropriate.
- Bring the published brief and your own questions about its process requirements.
- Use institutional clarification for a rule that is uncertain or assessment-specific.
- Keep responsibility for all research, legal judgment, writing and submission with the student.
Common questions
Frequently asked questions
What must I check in my dissertation brief before using AI?
Check whether AI is prohibited, permitted or limited; the exact activity allowed; whether it may affect assessed work; and the required acknowledgement, declaration, citation or record-keeping. A general web page cannot override a specific dissertation instruction, so ask your institution if the position remains unclear.[1] [2]
Can I use AI to brainstorm, find reading or improve a study plan?
Only where the rules for your dissertation permit that particular activity. Some settings distinguish learning uses from assessed work, but AI suggestions are not verified reading or authorities. You must independently undertake the required research and reading rather than use AI as a substitute for those skills.[1] [6]
Can I ask ChatGPT to write, paraphrase or improve part of my dissertation?
Do not assume so. Generated prose, paraphrase and substantial refinement can misrepresent authorship or change the work beyond permitted limits. Use them only if the assessment instructions expressly permit that exact use, and follow any stated boundaries and disclosure requirements.[1] [2] [6]
Are AI-generated cases and citations safe to use?
No. Never rely on a case, statute, article, quotation, pinpoint or proposition merely because AI supplied it. Subject to your brief's rules, independently locate and read the original authentic authority, and never list a source you have not consulted.[4] [6]
How should I record or declare permitted AI use?
Use the format prescribed by your brief. Where a declaration or acknowledgement is required, accurately state the tool, when and why it was used, the permitted purpose and any evidence requested, such as prompts, outputs or changes. Disclosure cannot make unauthorised use permissible.[3]
One-to-one support
Discuss your dissertation brief without crossing assessment boundaries
Need to talk through your dissertation brief or plan without crossing assessment boundaries? Explore policy-aware, one-to-one planning support. It is not a route to outsource research, writing or any assessed work.