AI hallucination cases in Australia
Ba v Sterling Parts Australia Pty Ltd
[2026] FedCFamC2G 1245
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) |
| Jurisdiction | Not recorded |
| Date | 1 July 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 1245 |
Summary from the trackers
Charlotin database
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | EV-001 listed as 'Signed Service Agreement' but not produced; relied on in pleading as central contractual evidence and inferred by court to be AI‑generated/fabricated. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | EV-016 listed as 'Dispatch System Screenshot' claimed but screenshots/photographs were not provided; court treated entry as unsupported and likely AI‑generated. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | EV-023 and EV-023a listed as 'Dispatch System Manual'
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 · Court AI practice notes