AI hallucination cases in Australia
Rinaldi v Department of Justice (Right to Information and Privacy)
[2026] QCATA 11
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal (QCAT) |
| Jurisdiction | Queensland |
| Date | 16 February 2026 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Appeal dismissed |
| Citation | [2026] QCATA 11 |
Summary from the trackers
OBITER
The Appellant made references to two decisions in their submissions that do not exist (see [36]–[37]). The Tribunal said (at [38]): ‘[i]t would appear the appellant has used artificial intelligence to generate part of his submission. The dangers of using artificial intelligence for legal research have been well-documented so as to avoid the risk of misleading the Tribunal, giving rise to a possible charge of contempt. Parties to proceedings in the Tribunal, and indeed in other Tribunals and cour
The tracker extract ends in the middle of a sentence.
Court AI rules
Sources
- OBITER AI Hallucination Cases: Australia
- AustLII
- AI Hallucination Cases Database, Damien Charlotin (CC BY 4.0)
All AI hallucination cases in Australia · Queensland · Court AI practice notes