AI hallucination cases in Australia
JML Rose Pty Ltd v Jorgensen (No 3)
[2025] FCA 976
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Federal Court of Australia — General Division |
| Jurisdiction | Commonwealth |
| Date | 19 August 2025 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | N/A |
| Citation | [2025] FCA 976 |
Summary from the trackers
OBITER
The self-represented litigant (First Respondent) used a form of generative artificial intelligence (AI), to assist with written and oral submissions for an Annulment Application ([7]). Wheatley J said (at [7]): ‘[m]any of the case citations were inaccurate. Some of the purported quoted passages did not exist. Such matters are likely the product of “hallucinations”. There has been an approach, which I will adopt, of redacting false case citations so that such information is not further propagated
The tracker extract ends in the middle of a sentence.
Court AI rules
Sources
- OBITER AI Hallucination Cases: Australia
- AI Hallucination Cases Database, Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0)
Related decisions
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · Commonwealth · Court AI practice notes