AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesAzar c. Université de Montréal
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 80/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

Azar c. Université de Montréal

Quebec CA · Nov 13, 2025

CanadaEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsadministrativetrialNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's request for leave to appeal. The court explicitly noted that the applicant relied on non-existent case law, which the respondent attributed to AI hallucinations, and that the applicant failed to provide any explanation for these citations.

Why the court cared
Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant relied on numerous case-law authorities that the Respondent demonstrated do not exist; Respondent characterized them as likely AI-generated hallucinations and the court noted the applicant gave no explanation.
Why it matters now
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Quebec CA, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

Why this matter is tracked

In an application for leave to appeal a Superior Court judgment regarding his dismissal from a Ph.D. program, the applicant, a pro se litigant, submitted numerous case-law authorities that the respondent identified as non-existent. The respondent characterized these citations as likely AI-generated hallucinations. When confronted with these inaccuracies during the hearing, the applicant provided no explanation for the presence of the fabricated authorities. The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the application for leave to appeal, noting that the appeal had no reasonable chance of success and that the applicant's use of non-existent case law further weighed against the interests of justice.

Operational lesson

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Quebec CA, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.

Record details

CourtQuebec CA
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateNov 13, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeApplication for leave to appeal dismissed with legal costs.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The respondent suggested the non-existent cases were the result of AI hallucinations.

Procedural posture

Application for leave to appeal from a Superior Court judgment dismissing safeguard measures.

Correction behavior

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.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant relied on numerous case-law authorities that the Respondent demonstrated do not exist; Respondent characterized them as likely AI-generated hallucinations and the court noted the applicant gave no explanation.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Azar c. Université de Montréal?
The Quebec Court of Appeal dismissed the applicant's request for leave to appeal. The court explicitly noted that the applicant relied on non-existent case law, which the respondent attributed to AI hallucinations, and that the applicant failed to provide any explanation for these citations.
Why does Azar c. Université de Montréal matter for legal AI risk?
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Quebec CA, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
What does the public record establish about Azar c. Université de Montréal?
Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Which source supports this Azar c. Université de Montréal 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.

Philippeaux v. United States, et al.S.D. New York · Sep 8, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Perry v. Social Security Administration, CommissionerN.D. Alabama · Aug 3, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)The JAAW Group, LLCGAO · Jul 31, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Alexander M. v. Frank BisignanoD. Maine · Jul 28, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2143 v. RobibaroOntario Condominium Authority Tribunal · Jul 28, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)14095863 Canada Inc v Moosehead Breweries LimitedTrademarks Opposition Board · Jul 3, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)