ATSJ NA 38/2024
TSJ Navarra · Sep 4, 2024
What happened in this matter?
The court declined to impose a sanction for the inclusion of a hallucinated legal citation generated by ChatGPT 3. While the court acknowledged the error and the risks associated with unverified AI use, it archived the separate proceeding without penalty due to the novelty of the technology and the lawyer's prompt admission and apology.
- Why the court cared
- The court reasoned that while the use of AI in legal practice requires strict human oversight and verification, the specific circumstances—the novelty of the technology and the lawyer's immediate, sincere apology upon the court's identification of the error—warranted archiving the matter without a monetary sanction.
- Why it matters now
- ChatGPT cited a Colombian statute as Spanish law — never let a consumer chatbot quote foreign codes into your brief.
Why this matter is tracked
In a criminal complaint filed before the Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Navarra, the plaintiff included a citation to 'article 454B of the Penal Code' attributed to the Spanish Supreme Court. The court identified that this provision does not exist in Spanish law and is instead derived from the Penal Code of Colombia. The plaintiff admitted that the error resulted from the improper use of ChatGPT 3. The court opened a separate proceeding to evaluate potential bad faith or procedural abuse. Ultimately, the court decided to archive the separate proceeding without imposing a monetary sanction, citing the novelty of the issue and the lawyer's immediate apology and admission of the error upon discovery.
ChatGPT cited a Colombian statute as Spanish law — never let a consumer chatbot quote foreign codes into your brief.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The plaintiff admitted the error was caused by ChatGPT 3.
The court issued an 'Auto' (Resolution No. 2/2024) to archive a separate proceeding previously opened to investigate potential procedural bad faith regarding the use of AI-generated content.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Legal Norm | Inclusion in the complaint of a quoted statutory provision 'artículo 454B del Código Penal' attributed to the Spanish Supreme Court; the Sala found the provision does not exist in Spanish law and corresponds to the Penal Code of Colombia, and traced the source to use of ChatGPT 3.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in ATSJ NA 38/2024?
- The court declined to impose a sanction for the inclusion of a hallucinated legal citation generated by ChatGPT 3. While the court acknowledged the error and the risks associated with unverified AI use, it archived the separate proceeding without penalty due to the novelty of the technology and the lawyer's prompt admission and apology.
- Why does ATSJ NA 38/2024 matter for legal AI risk?
- ChatGPT cited a Colombian statute as Spanish law — never let a consumer chatbot quote foreign codes into your brief.
- What does the public record establish about ATSJ NA 38/2024?
- 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 ATSJ NA 38/2024 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.