HomeCasesAbraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration

Federal Court · Jun 3, 2026

CanadaEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authorityadministrative

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's submissions relied on numerous case citations that the Court found did not exist; the Court attributed these fabricated citations to the applicant's undeclared use of AI. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Adverse Costs Order; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order in Federal Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order in Federal Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtFederal Court

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateJun 3, 2026

AI toolUnidentified

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeAdverse Costs Order

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

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

Procedural posture

Adverse Costs Order

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's submissions relied on numerous case citations that the Court found did not exist; the Court attributed these fabricated citations to the applicant's undeclared use of AI.
Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant relied on a non-existent case citation cited as support for a 15-19 day timeline; Court found no decision corresponding to the citation.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Tesfay v Canada (C&I), 2016 FC 1300' but the neutral citation 2016 FC 1300 corresponds to Alhezma v Canada; Court found the citation unreliable/misrepresented.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Mohammadian v Canada (C&I), 2017 FC 1021' but 2017 FC 1021 corresponds to Boily v Canada; Court treated this as a mis-citation.
Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Khan v Canada (C&I), 2011 FC 130' but 2011 FC 130 corresponds to Public Mobile Inc v Canada (Attorney General); Court found the citation did not support Applicant's argument.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?: Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's submissions relied on numerous case citations that the Court found did not exist; the Court attributed these fabricated citations to the applicant's undeclared use of AI. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
Why does Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects pro se and fake citations involving Unidentified with Adverse Costs Order in Federal Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?: 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.
Which source supports this Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration summary?: The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.

Related matters

Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.

Myriane Béland v. Procureur général du CanadaFederal Court · Jun 11, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Amit Arora v Canadian National RailwayFederal Court · Apr 15, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Amit Arora v. Canadian National RailwayFederal Court · Jan 19, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Marie Pia Fazio v Canada Revenue AgencyFederal Court · May 21, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Erin Gray v Attorney General of CanadaFederal Court · Mar 5, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations Alexandra Philomena Brigid Roy v Attorney General of CanadaFederal Court · Jan 9, 2026same court · pro se + fake citations

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Tracked discrepancy record

5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant relied on a non-existent case citation cited as support for a 15-19 day timeline; Court found no decision corresponding to the citation.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Tesfay v Canada (C&I), 2016 FC 1300' but the neutral citation 2016 FC 1300 corresponds to Alhezma v Canada; Court found the citation unreliable/misrepresented.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Mohammadian v Canada (C&I), 2017 FC 1021' but 2017 FC 1021 corresponds to Boily v Canada; Court treated this as a mis-citation.

Misrepresented: Case Law | Applicant cited 'Khan v Canada (C&I), 2011 FC 130' but 2011 FC 130 corresponds to Public Mobile Inc v Canada (Attorney General); Court found the citation did not support Applicant's argument.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?

Why does Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?

Which source supports this Abraham Okogun v The Minister of Citizenship and Immigration summary?

The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.