概要: In a London housing case, England's High Court found that a barrister cited five reportedly fictitious cases and ordered her and the Haringey Law Centre, a legal aid charity, to pay £4,000 in wasted costs. Opposing counsel alleged AI use. The barrister denied using generative AI. The Divisional Court identified AI use as one of two possible explanations for the citations.
Editor Notes: 08/28/2024: Grounds dated that day contained five fictitious case citations. 02/04/2025: The council's solicitor flagged the five citations and asked for copies. 04/03/2025: The High Court ordered £4,000 in wasted costs and directed that its judgment be sent to professional regulators. 06/06/2025: The Divisional Court left AI use unresolved, declined to initiate contempt proceedings, and referred the barrister to her regulator. 11/08/2026: The incident ID was created.
Alleged: Large language model developers developed an AI system deployed by Sarah Forey , Lawyers と Legal professionals, which harmed High Court of Justice (England and Wales) , London Borough of Haringey , Haringey Law Centre , Epistemic integrity , Judicial integrity , Courts と Parties to legal proceedings.
関与が疑われるAIシステム: Large language models と AI-assisted legal research systems
インシデントのステータス
インシデントID
1813
レポート数
3
インシデント発生日
2025-06-06
エディタ
Daniel Atherton
インシデントレポート
レポートタイムライン
Loading...
Andrew Ritchieによるインシデント後のレスポンス
Mr Justice Ritchie:
1. In this case I have before me an application for relief from sanctions dated 7 March 2023. What it says is that the London Borough of Haringey asks the court to grant:
“d) Relief from sanctions so that we can partici…
Loading...
A High Court judge who discovered that lawyers presented five fake case citations in their submissions has ordered that his judgment be sent to professional regulators.
Mr Justice Ritchie said solicitors and barristers involved in Ayinde, R…
Loading...
Victoria Sharp, Jeremy Johnsonによるインシデント後のレスポンス
AIID editor's note
This judgment has been abridged to fit the AIID's 50,000-character limit. It retains paragraphs 1–9 and 32–82, including the court's treatment of both cases and its further steps. It omits paragraphs 10–31 on professiona…
バリアント
「バリアント」は既存のAIインシデントと同じ原因要素を共有し、同様な被害を引き起こし、同じ知的システムを含んだインシデントです。バリアントは完全に独立したインシデントとしてインデックスするのではなく、データベースに最初に投稿された同様なインシデントの元にインシデントのバリエーションとして一覧します。インシデントデータベースの他の投稿タイプとは違い、バリアントではインシデントデータベース以外の根拠のレポートは要求されません。詳細についてはこの研究論文を参照してください
似たようなものを見つけましたか？