# _SPECIAL EDITION_
# AI and the Law
# CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS

Artificial Intelligence is reshaping the legal landscape—transforming how legal knowledge is formed, decisions are made, and justice is administered. Once focused on mimicking human reasoning, AI now operates as autonomous, data-driven systems that raise profound legal, ethical, and governance challenges. From privacy and bias to accountability and cross-border regulation, the integration of AI into legal domains demands urgent and thoughtful examination. We are delighted to welcome Professor Nick James, Executive Dean of the Faculty of Law at Bond University and Co-Director of the Centre for Professional Legal Education, as Guest Editor for this special edition. Professor James is a nationally recognised scholar in legal education, digital disruption of the legal profession, and the ethical implications of emerging technologies. His interdisciplinary approach will guide this edition’s exploration of how artificial intelligence is reshaping legal systems, professional practice, and societal norms. We invite submissions that critically engage with the legal, ethical, and regulatory dimensions of AI. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to: • AI Governance and information privacy rights • Cross-border internet platform challenges and AI regulations • Formal and computational models of legal knowledge • Artificial intelligent systems in the legal domain • Machine learning and data mining in legal contexts • Artificial intelligence and dispute resolution (including litigation) • Chatbots and assistants for legal or negotiation support • Legal and ethical challenges of AI in the context of copyright and IP **Manuscripts must be submitted by February 6, 2026.** Please read the submission guidelines below and direct any questions about this special edition to the Publications Officer at BLR@bond.edu.au # Instructions for Authors The Bond Law Review invites contributions from practitioners and legal scholars worldwide in the form of articles (between 6,000 and 12,000 words excluding footnotes) and case notes and book reviews (up to 3,000 words) . In exceptional circumstances, the Editorial Committee may consider longer or shorter manuscripts, depending on their quality. Although no formal limit is placed on the number and length of footnotes, these should not be excessive having regard to the nature of the topic, the extent of prior scholarship, and so forth. Manuscripts must be original, unpublished work. The Bond Law Review does not consider manuscripts that are currently being considered elsewhere. All manuscripts must include a short abstract of no more than 200 words. This journal does not levy any Article Processing Charges for the processing or publication of a paper and download statistics are provided for each article. The BLR accepts submissions on a rolling basis — that is, there are no formal submission dates. Articles are published on the basis of merit. The BLR is registered with the [Copyright Agency](https://www.copyright.com.au/membership/join-us/) and free membership is available for authors. # Indigenous Knowledge Where a proposed article is addressing Indigenous affairs, or a matter that is primarily of concern to First Nations peoples, all efforts should be made to include an Indigenous or First Nations author or co-author. If this is not possible an Indigenous reviewer will be sought. In the absence of credited input from an Indigenous or First Nations academic such an article will only be published if a genuine attempt has been made to satisfy this policy. # Open Access This open access journal does not levy any Article Processing Charge for the processing or publication of a paper and download statistics are provided for each article. All accepted papers are published and made available at no cost to the author or the reader. Article copyright remains with the author. Published articles are made available under an Attribution NonCommercial NoDerivatives Creative Commons Licence [(CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Under the terms of this licence, authors retain full rights (i.e., are not bound by the terms of the licence, and can use their works in any way, including commercially), while others are only permitted to copy and distribute their work in an unadapted form for non-commercial purposes. The BLR has relationships with online academic databases and will make the article available via them, in order to increase the rate of circulation and citation of articles. # Submit Manuscript Manuscripts must be uploaded as a Word document only with all reference to author/s identify removed. Should submission of a revised manuscript be required, authors must upload the Word doc via ‘Manage manuscript’ only. All articles submitted to the Journal will be subject to checks for plagiarism using iThenticate plagiarism detection software. **Anonymity** In order to maintain anonymity in the review process, authors are required to ensure that all information that might identify the author to potential reviewers should be removed (including his or her credentials), references to his or her other publications (unless included as a general reference), and identification of affiliated organisation and/or geographic location. **Citation Style** The manuscript should conform to the most recent edition of the Australian Guide to Legal Citation [AGLC 4th ed](https://drive.google.com/file/d/1TGvYqdqQnOU-GtSV3I25ft6EyYIx_w4U/edit), as published by the Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc. Authors should pay particular attention to the proper style for citing cases, legislation, books and journal articles, and ensure that pinpoint references are accurate. While the Editorial Committee endeavours to check all references, authors bear ultimate responsibility for the accuracy of all references contained in their manuscript. All quotes should accord with AGLC 4th ed. In brief, this means that: * Short quotes (less than 3 lines) should not be separated from the main text and should be identified by single quotation marks. Quotes within short quotes should be identified by double quotation marks; and * Long quotes (more than 3 lines) should be separated from the text, indented from the left margin, and should not be identified by quotation marks. Quotes within long quotes should be identified by single quotation marks. **Submission Format** All manuscripts must comply with the following formatting requirements. 1. Manuscripts must be word processed, double-spaced and with margins of at least 2.5 cm. 2. Manuscripts should be presented in one or other of the following font styles: Iskoola Pota, Times New Roman or Arial. The font size should be no less than 10 point (for the main text) or 8 point (for footnotes). 3. Page numbering should be used and indicated by Arabic numerals. 4. Footnotes (not endnotes) should be used and indicated by Arabic numerals. 5. Footnotes should be indented from the left margin and fully justified. 6. Headings should be used where appropriate and should be formatted in accordance with AGLC 4th ed. 7. Abbreviations may be used provided that the name is set out in full, followed by the abbreviation in brackets, at the first usage (e.g. United Nations ('UN')). 8. Internal cross-referencing should be to footnotes or parts (e.g. see above, n 1, 11; see above, Part IA), and not to page numbers. 9. Internal references to the manuscript should be to the 'article' (not 'paper', 'essay', etc). 10. Manuscripts may include tables, diagrams and other graphics; however, these should be set out as clearly as possible, in black and white only, and must be of sufficient quality to reproduce and, if necessary, reduce. # Review Process On submission, manuscripts are subject to an initial review by the General Editor, the Editorial Committee, or another delegated person, at which stage a preliminary decision is made as to whether the article might be suitable for publication in the Bond Law Review. The Editorial Committee may at this stage reject any article that, in its opinion, has little relevance to the Bond Law Review's readership, or for any other reason. All manuscripts that pass the first stage of review are double-blind refereed by at least two specialists in the field. If approved for publication, articles undergo a rigorous internal editing process conducted by a staff and student editorial team. While the Editorial Committee endeavours to ensure that the review process (not including editing) is carried out as quickly as possible, authors should plan for this process to take anywhere between 6-10 weeks. #_Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement_ The Bond Law Review Editorial Committee is committed to upholding the highest standards of ethical conduct in all aspects of publication. We expect all participants to be familiar with and abide by the following Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement. This statement is informed by guidelines and best practices set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and the current Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research. **Authors' Responsibilities** - Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that their work is original and has not been published elsewhere. Plagiarism in all its forms is unacceptable. - Authorship: All authors should have substantially contributed to the research. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission to the BLR. For further guidance regarding international standards for authorship, please refer to the [ICMJE](https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/national-statement-ethical-conduct-human-research-2023). - Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. - Data Access and Retention: Authors should be prepared to provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and must retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Please see the current [University Sector Retention and Disposal Schedule](https://www.forgov.qld.gov.au/information-technology/recordkeeping-and-information-management/recordkeeping/disposal-of-records/search-for-a-retention-and-disposal-schedule/university-sector-retention-and-disposal-schedule) for recommended retention periods. - Ethical Approval: Authors must confirm that any research involving human or animal subjects complies with relevant ethical standards and has received appropriate approvals. Please refer to the current [National Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research for further guidance on this topic.](https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/about-us/publications/national-statement-ethical-conduct-human-research-2023) **Editors' Responsibilities** - Publication Decisions: The editors are responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The decision will be based on expert peer reviews of the paper's importance, originality, and clarity, and the study's validity and relevance to the journal's scope. - Confidentiality: The editors and editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher. - Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editors must not use unpublished information in their own research without the express written consent of the author. They should recuse themselves from handling manuscripts in which they have any conflict of interest. **Reviewers' Responsibilities** - Confidentiality: Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editors, and under no circumstances may a manuscript be submitted to an AI tool. - Standards of Objectivity: Expert peer reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments. - Acknowledgement of Sources: Peer reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by a relevant citation or citations. - Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have any conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper under review. **Research Misconduct and Breaches** Authors are expected to be aware of, and comply with, best practices in publication ethics in accordance with COPE’s Core Practice Guidance and the current Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research to ensure research integrity. Examples of a breach of research integrity relating to author submissions include, but are not limited to: - Not Meeting Research Standards: o Conducting research without ethics approval, permits, or licences. o Failing to conduct research as approved by an appropriate ethics review body. o Concealment or facilitation of breaches (or potential breaches) of the Code by others. - Fabrication, Falsification, or Misrepresentation: o Fabrication of research data or source material. o Falsification of research data or source material. o Misrepresentation of research data or source material. - Plagiarism: o Plagiarism of someone else’s work, including theories, concepts, research data, and source material. o Duplicate publication or text-recycling (self-plagiarism) without acknowledgment of the original source. - Authorship: o Failure to acknowledge the contributions of others fairly. o Misleading ascription of authorship, including failing to offer authorship to those who qualify for it, or awarding authorship to those who do not meet the requirements for it. - Conflict of Interest: o Failure to disclose and manage any conflict of interest. **Dealing with Unethical Behaviour** - Identification and Investigation: Unethical behaviour can be reported to the editors and publisher at any time, by anyone. Concerns should be directed to the journal’s administrative team at BLR@bond.edu.au. The editors will ensure that an appropriate investigation is conducted, which may involve contacting the author for clarification and allowing them to respond to any allegations. Each case will be evaluated individually, and confidentiality will be maintained throughout the process. - Outcomes: Depending on the severity of the misconduct, possible actions include issuing a warning to the author, retraction of the published work, rejection of a submission and notifying the author’s institution. The BLR will follow the guidelines set by COPE and the Australian Code for the Responsible Conduct of Research in dealing with allegations of misconduct. **Statement on the Use of Generative AI** Generative AI Use: The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process is permitted to develop, edit and improve the language of the article under the following conditions: - Disclosure: Authors must disclose the use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the manuscript (Acknowledgements section). In the interests of identifying replication and/or falsification, the full prompt used to generate the research results, the time and date of query, and the AI tool used and its version, must be provided. - Human Oversight: The application of AI should be done with human oversight and control. Generative AI must not be used to form arguments or create or manipulate data. Authors are responsible for reviewing and editing all AI-generated content to ensure accuracy and integrity. - Accountability: Authors are ultimately responsible for the content of their work. AI tools should not be listed as authors or co-authors, as authorship implies responsibilities that can only be attributed to humans. These guidelines aim to ensure transparency, to maintain the integrity of the research published in the BLR, and to uphold the ethical standards of the BLR. **Complaints and Appeals** Complaints should be directed to the Editors-in-Chief of the BLR via the email below. If the response is not satisfactory, the complaint will be reviewed by the editorial team, whose decision will be final. # Contact For all general enquiries please contact the Bond Law Review at: Email: blr@bond.edu.au

Still Jammed! Lingering Questions About the Statutory Unconscionability Doctrine Post Stubbings v Jams 2 Pty Ltd (2022) 399 ALR 409