ATSJ NA 38/2024
TSJ Navarra · Sep 4, 2024
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- TSJ Navarra
- Record ID
- atsj-na-382024-2024-09-04
- Observed outcome
- The court archived the separate proceeding regarding potential procedural bad faith without imposing any monetary or professional sanction.
- Known monetary consequence
- €0
Why this matter warrants attention
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.
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.
ChatGPT cited a Colombian statute as Spanish law — never let a consumer chatbot quote foreign codes into your brief.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Criminal
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- CHATGPT 3
- Known monetary consequence
- €0
- Procedural posture
- 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.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The plaintiff admitted the error was caused by ChatGPT 3.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Compare every quoted passage and pincite directly with the underlying opinion or filing.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to CHATGPT 3 output as to any other research input.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.