AI hallucination cases in Australia
Page v. Long
Citation pending. The trackers have not recorded a medium-neutral citation.
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Melbourne County Court |
| Jurisdiction | Not recorded |
| Date | 27 June 2025 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Litigant lost on merits |
| Citation | citation pending |
Summary from the trackers
Charlotin database
"Generative AI can be beguiling, particularly when the task of representing yourself seems overwhelming. However, a litigant runs the risk that their case will be damaged, rather than helped, if they choose to use AI without taking the time to understand what it produces, and to confirm that it is both legally and factually accurate. "
The tracker extract ends in the middle of a sentence.
Court AI rules
Sources
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · Court AI practice notes