AI hallucination cases in Australia
Ellul v State of Queensland
[2026] QIRC 147
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Queensland IRC |
| Jurisdiction | Queensland |
| Date | 29 April 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] QIRC 147 |
Summary from the trackers
Charlotin database
Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Keegan v Sussan Corporation (Aust.) Pty Ltd [2014] QIRC 193', which the Commission could not locate and identified as a misattribution (the citation corresponds to Morton v State of Queensland [2014] QIRC 193); court inferred likely AI use and found the authority irrelevant to the extension issue. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Robinson v State of Queensland [2015] QIRC 165', which the Commission identified as incorrect and belonging to
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 · Queensland · Court AI practice notes