AI hallucination cases in Australia
Abudahou v Metro Finance Pty Ltd
[2026] FedCFamC2G 1512
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) |
| Jurisdiction | Commonwealth |
| Date | 5 August 2026 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Not recorded |
| Citation | [2026] FedCFamC2G 1512 |
Summary from the trackers
Charlotin database
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Applicant relied on a non-existent provision 's 41(7)(a)' of the Bankruptcy Act as the basis to set aside the bankruptcy notice; court held the provision does not exist. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Applicant cited a non-existent court rule 'rule 2.02(4)' of the Bankruptcy Rules in submissions; court identified the reference as erroneous. || Fabricated: Case Law | Submissions relied upon numerous authorities which the court found could not be located or did not stand for
The tracker extract ends in the middle of a sentence.
Court AI rules
Sources
- AI Hallucination Cases Database, Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0)
- Judgment copy cited by the Charlotin database
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · Commonwealth · Court AI practice notes