AI hallucination cases in Australia
Meniscus Pty Ltd ATF The Meniscus Trust v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue
[2025] NSWCATAD 209
Also recorded as The Meniscus Trust v Chief Commissioner of State Revenue.
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal (NCAT) |
| Jurisdiction | New South Wales |
| Date | 21 August 2025 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Google Gemini; ChatGPT |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Arguments produced by AI given lesser weight |
| Citation | [2025] NSWCATAD 209 |
Summary from the trackers
OBITER
The litigant in person (Applicant) stated that they had used generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) in the preparation of their submissions (Google Gemini and ChatGPT) ([37]). The Tribunal placed more weight on the records included in the Applicant’s bundles rather than on the submissions that were prepared by the Applicant with the use of GenAI ([40]).
Charlotin database
The self-represented Applicant admitted using generative AI (Google Gemini and ChatGPT) to prepare submissions. NCAT Procedural Direction 7 requires verification of citations when Gen AI is used; the Applicant did not verify citations. The Tribunal accepted the submissions into the record but placed greater weight on primary records and noted non-compliance with the verification requirement.
Court AI rules
Sources
- OBITER AI Hallucination Cases: Australia
- AustLII
- AI Hallucination Cases Database, Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0)
- Judgment copy cited by the Charlotin database
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · New South Wales · Court AI practice notes