AI hallucination cases in Australia
Clarke v State of Queensland (Department of Education)
[2025] QIRC 300
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) |
| Jurisdiction | Queensland |
| Date | 5 November 2025 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | ChatGPT |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Not recorded |
| Citation | [2025] QIRC 300 |
Summary from the trackers
OBITER
The self‑represented litigant (Applicant) submitted authorities that, while containing party names and parts of a medium‑neutral citation, lacked case numbers and paragraph references (see [22]–[25]). Industrial Commissioner Pratt (‘Pratt IC’) was unable to locate any of those decisions or quoted passages ([25]). The Applicant admitted the authorities were from artificial intelligence, relying on ChatGPT in preparing submissions and reply (at [25]). Pratt IC dismissed the matter ([49]).
Court AI rules
Sources
- OBITER AI Hallucination Cases: Australia
- AustLII
- AI Hallucination Cases Database, Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0)
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · Queensland · Court AI practice notes