Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-0MP7LLPGenerated November 13, 2026Evidence checked Nov 13, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

2028604 Ontario Ltd. v. His Majesty the King

Tax Court of Canada · Oct 28, 2026

Short answer. Status: Warning; amount: no amount stated. Tax Court of Canada, decision date on record October 28, 2026. As of November 13, 2026. Court source · Methodology

Jurisdiction
International
Court
Tax Court of Canada
Record ID
2028604-ontario-ltd-v-his-majesty-the-king-2026-10-28
Observed outcome
Warning
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

Misrepresented: Case Law | The appellant attributed propositions concerning representation under section 17.1(1.1) to paragraphs 14, 16, and 18 of Masa Sushi Japanese Restaurant v. The Queen, but the Court found that those paragraphs did not support the asserted propositions. The decision also predated the statutory amendment creating the relevant leave authority. Outcome: Warning.

Why the decision-maker cared

The structured public record identifies fake citations and misrepresented authority and records Warning. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.

Why it matters now

This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Warning in Tax Court of Canada. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Fake Citations
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Tax
  • Trial
  • Warning
AI attribution
Not Established
Recorded tool
Unidentified
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Warning
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
  2. Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
  3. Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.