From Fake Invoices to Fake Cases: Tech Pitfalls in Construction and Law
By Akshara Abimanju & Maya Sathiamoorthy
Whether you’re a lawyer or a builder – AI, media literacy and cybersecurity concerns are shifting the landscape of your profession. In this newsletter, Crisp Law delves into some recent cases that remind us to be vigilant of what information we choose to accept and use in the workplace. We discuss a recent cybersecurity breach costing an Australian construction company $51,000, and a lawyer who was referred to a disciplinary body for submitting AI generated material to court (Valu No. 2, 2025). These two recent headlines are a microcosm of the emerging information crisis, and they reflect an increasing need for professionals to keep up with technological changes across industries. It is essential to maintain a heightened awareness of regulations and liabilities and maintain adequate legal protections; this includes ensuring that your businesses’ contract suits and insurance arrangements address cybersecurity risks.
Case 1: Building company fraudulently charged $51,000 due to scam invoice
According to a study conducted by Small Business Ombudsman Kate Carnell, a survey of 2000 small business revealed that 62% of them had been affected by a cybersecurity breach (ABC). Last year, it was reported that Australians lost $16.2 million to payment redirection scams (ACCC). Fake invoices are often difficult to distinguish, and builders should exercise extra caution when facilitating payments. In 2020, the ABC brought light to one story amongst many cases of payment scams. Jane Fleming helps run her family’s building business, had arranged to pay $51,000 to a subcontractor. She had worked with Simon O’Donnell for almost a decade and made many payments to him over the years. She received an unusually large invoice from him; the invoice looked the same as previous invoices, and Simon’s email was correct. She noticed that the bank account was different, so she updated his details, then transferred the payment. When Simon contacted her asking her where the funds were, she immediately realised something was wrong. It was found that Simon had sent the email on Friday afternoon, but it had only reached Jane on Saturday morning. The ABC and Professor Paul Haskell-Dowland speculated that the scammers intercepted and altered the email using malware; this constitutes a sophisticated business email compromise (BEC) scam. These scams are highly common – in the first half of 2024, Scamwatch received 1,099 reports of BEC scams worth $3.7 million in losses. Jane was devastated by the loss of these funds and attempted to work with multiple institutions such as Commonwealth Bank, Bendigo Bank, the Victoria Police, ASIC and AFCA to resolve the issue, but efforts for compensation and investigation have been largely unsuccessful. This case exemplifies the increasingly deceptive and intricate nature of scams, as an unassuming message from a trusted colleague could be compromised.
Case 2: An Australian Lawyer who misused AI
AI programs such as Chat GPT have the capacity to ‘hallucinate’ or provide users with completely fabricated information in response to a question – amusingly and concerningly, it often declares these fake facts with unfaltering certainty. The capacity for AI to mislead and misinform users has created a widespread gap in media literacy, as users are increasingly unable to tell the difference between fact and fiction. Legal scholars widely emphasise that competent lawyers must be able identify how to use AI responsibly, particularly where it aids productivity and reduces the cost and delay associated with legal services (Legg, Bell 2025; 59).
This expectation is being treated seriously within the legal profession. Recently, a lawyer was found to be citing cases and quotes that were fabricated by AI in submissions to the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Valu v Minister for Immigration and Multicultural Affairs (No 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95). Accordingly, they were referred to the disciplinary body for legal professionals, the Office of the NSW Legal Services Commissioner. Judge Rania Skaros commented on the subsequent delay caused to court; “the court and the associates had already spent a considerable amount of time attempting to locate the cases and enquiring as to whether the correct decision had been filed”. The lawyer cited pressures such as health issues and constraints on time as reasons for using AI; he noted that the summary read well, so he chose to incorporate the cases into his submissions without checking the details.
In 2025, AI was marked as one of the fastest-growing areas in digital transformation for the construction industry (TechUK). In NSW, the use of AI is regulated under the Supreme Court Practice Note SC Gen 23 ‘Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)’. The Practice Note (SC PN) acknowledges the ability for GenAI to assist legal practitioners or unrepresented parties with legal processes such as document preparation and information summarisation. Whilst courts acknowledge the benefits of GenAI, the SC PN also states that it must be used with caution due to confidentiality and accuracy concerns. The retention of sensitive or personal data within an AI’s database may constitute a significant security risk (Transcend). This includes risks of data breaches and AI technologies using personal information without individuals fully understanding or consenting to their data being used. Whilst there are privacy policies and strict regulations around data usage, there is a risk of ‘spillover data collections’ – meaning that AI-tools may unintentionally use the data provided to it (ISACA). Furthermore, the SC PN forbids using GenAI to formulate evidentiary material and expert opinions.
How can businesses respond to technological changes?
Whether you’re in the business of construction or law, evolving technology will empower your business, yet creates new liabilities – at Crisp Law, we seek to understand new challenges in these fields. We urge builders and lawyers to cross check their payments, to maintain exceptional awareness of modern payment scams and the pitfalls and benefits of AI. All professionals, especially construction lawyers, must ensure that there is proper oversight in the use of GenAI by verifying that no confidential information has been submitted, and all outputs are fact checked. The most crucial protection is investment in cybersecurity protections and insurance.
Contact Crisp Law for advice and information at:
Telephone: +61 2 8042 8701
Email: admin@crisplaw.com.au
Bibliography
ABC News, 2020. Business email scam: Tradie’s computer hacked, costs $51,000. [online] ABC News. Available at: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-24/business-email-scam-tradies-computer-hacked-costs-51000/12817584 [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
ACCC, 2024. Beware of fake invoices from scammers impersonating businesses. [online] Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. Available at: https://www.accc.gov.au/media-release/beware-of-fake-invoices-from-scammers-impersonating-businesses [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Arma Insurance, n.d. $51,000 business email scam: Tradies disappointed by banks. [online] Available at: https://armainsurancehv.com.au/51000-business-email-scam-tradies-disappointed-by-banks/ [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Deloitte, 2023. State of digital adoption in the construction industry. [online] Deloitte. Available at: https://www.deloitte.com/au/en/services/economics/analysis/state-digital-adoption-construction-industry.html [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Fenwick Elliott, 2023. AI and change in construction law. [online] Available at: https://www.fenwickelliott.com/research-insight/annual-review/2023/ai-change-construction-law [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
ISACA, 2021. Beware the privacy violations in artificial intelligence applications. [online] ISACA Now Blog. Available at: https://www.isaca.org/resources/news-and-trends/isaca-now-blog/2021/beware-the-privacy-violations-in-artificial-intelligence-applications [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Law Society of NSW, 2020. Artificial Intelligence and the Legal Profession: Becoming the AI-Enhanced Lawyer. [online] Available at: https://www.lawsociety.com.au/sites/default/files/2020-11/Artificial%20Intelligence%20and%20the%20Legal%20Profession%20-%20Becoming%20the%20AI-Enhanced%20Lawyer.pdf [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Legal Services Council, 2015. Legal Profession Uniform Law Australian Solicitors’ Conduct Rules 2015 (NSW). [online] Available at: https://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/sl-2015-244 [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
LSE Truth, Trust and Technology Commission, 2018. Tackling the information crisis: A policy framework for media system resilience. [online] London School of Economics. Available at: https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/truth-trust-and-technology-commission/The-report [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Sammut, C., 2025. Experienced lawyer referred to regulator over ChatGPT blunder. [online] Lawyers Weekly. Available at: https://www.lawyersweekly.com.au/biglaw/41421-experienced-lawyer-referred-to-regulator-over-chatgpt-blunder [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
TechUK, 2023. AI and society: A case study on positive social change. [online] Available at: https://www.techuk.org/resource/ai-and-society-a-case-study-on-positive-social-change.html [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
The Guardian, 2025. Australian lawyer caught using ChatGPT filed court documents referencing non-existent cases. [online] Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2025/feb/01/australian-lawyer-caught-using-chatgpt-filed-court-documents-referencing-non-existent-cases [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Transcend, 2023. AI privacy issues. [online] Transcend.io. Available at: https://transcend.io/blog/ai-privacy-issues [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia, 2025. Tapp v Tapp (No. 2) [2025] FedCFamC2G 95. [online] AustLII. Available at: https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/cases/cth/FedCFamC2G/2025/95.html [Accessed 11 Jun. 2025].
