Beslissing in de zaak 26-379/DB/LI/D
Raad van Discipline · Jul 27, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Raad van Discipline
- Record ID
- beslissing-in-de-zaak-26-379-db-li-d-2026-07-27
- Observed outcome
- Reprimand; Monetary Fine
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Fabricated: Case Law | Multiple cited ECLI references in the conclusions of answer could not be traced and at least one ECLI number did not exist; the lawyer withdrew these references in an 'akte rectificatie'. Outcome: Reprimand; Monetary Fine. The lawyer used one or more AI tools to generate case law citations in two tenant-law matters; several cited ECLI references were non-existent and others pointed to unrelated decisions. The lawyer later filed rectification statements withdrawing the incorrect references and admitted use of AI without adequate verification. The Raad found this conduct breached the core values of expertise and integrity, imposed a reprimand, and ordered payment of €1,250 costs. (Summary by GPT 5.1.)
The structured public record identifies fake citations and misrepresented authority and records Reprimand; Monetary Fine. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Reprimand; Monetary Fine in Raad van Discipline. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Trial
- Monetary
- Professional
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- LegalPA
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Reprimand; Monetary Fine
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
LegalPA is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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.
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.