AI hallucination cases in Australia
Geha Enterprises Pty Ltd v Deuteronomy 28 Investments Pty Ltd and Registrar General of the ACT
[2026] ACTSC 103
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | ACT SC |
| Jurisdiction | Australian Capital Territory |
| Date | 21 April 2026 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Leave to represent the corporation refused; interlocutory application dismissed; costs awarded to the plaintiff. |
| Citation | [2026] ACTSC 103 |
Summary from the trackers
Charlotin database
Fabricated: Case Law | Court found the authority 'Checked Nominees Pty Ltd v ANZ Banking Group Ltd [1986] 4 ACLC 196' does not exist and was generated by the applicant's use of generative AI. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court found the authority 'Re Unique Building Services Pty Ltd [2012] ACTSC 104' does not exist and was generated by the applicant's use of generative AI.
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 · Australian Capital Territory · Court AI practice notes