AI hallucination cases in Australia
Stewart v Good Shepherd Australia New Zealand
[2025] VSCA 206
Also recorded as Stewart v Good Shepherd.
| Detail | What the trackers record |
|---|---|
| Court | Supreme Court of Victoria — Court of Appeal |
| Jurisdiction | Victoria |
| Date | 29 August 2025 |
| Who used AI | Self-represented |
| Tool named by the trackers | Not named |
| Sanction for the AI use | No professional sanction |
| Outcome | Not recorded |
| Citation | [2025] VSCA 206 |
Summary from the trackers
OBITER
The litigant in person’s (Applicant’s) use of AI in written submissions, including fabricated authorities and citations; arguments supported in places by reference to non‑existent authorities; and references to passages in real authorities that bore no relationship to the argument (see [62]–[63]).
Charlotin database
Fabricated: Case Law | The applicant's written submissions included 'non-existent authority' citations (fabricated cases/authorities); the judge noted these as phantom authorities and said their inclusion did not help the applicant. || Misrepresented: Case Law | The applicant cited real authorities but relied on passages that bore no relationship to the arguments, which the judge described as misplaced or misapplied references.
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 · Victoria · Court AI practice notes