Balogun v. Wentworth Standard Condominium Corporation No. 382
ONCAT · Dec 5, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- ONCAT
- Record ID
- balogun-v-wentworth-standard-condominium-corporation-no-382-2025-12-05
- Observed outcome
- The application was dismissed by the Tribunal.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Tribunal dismissed the application after finding the applicant's submissions were generated by AI and contained three fabricated case citations. The Chair refused to consider the arguments supported by these hallucinations and ultimately dismissed the case because the underlying dispute regarding maintenance and repair chargebacks fell outside the Tribunal's statutory jurisdiction.
Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's response cited a non-existent case to support that the Tribunal had jurisdiction; Tribunal found the case does not exist and characterized it as an AI hallucination. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's response cited a second non-existent case to support jurisdictional arguments; Tribunal determined this citation was fabricated by AI and did not exist. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant's response cited a third non-existent case; Tribunal characterized the citation as an AI-generated hallucination and refused to treat it as authoritative.
Ontario condo tribunals openly label AI-hallucinated jurisdictional cites and refuse to consider them.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- generative artificial intelligence
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Dismissal order issued by the Condominium Authority Tribunal following a Notice of Intent to Dismiss.
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 Tribunal identified the submissions as written using generative artificial intelligence.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.