Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Butler and National Disability Insurance Agency
Administrative Review Tribunal · Aug 28, 2025
AustraliaEditorial impact: lowfake citationsadministrativetrial
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Expert reports were prepared with AI assistance that introduced unverified or incorrect citations and inserted wording (e.g., the phrase 'minimum necessary'); Mr Reilly corrected some AI-generated citations and authors could not confirm citation accuracy. Outcome: Tribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight. The Agency raised concerns that several expert reports were prepared with assistance of an artificial intelligence program and contained unverified citations and inserted text.…
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Tribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Expert reports drafted with AI got reduced evidentiary weight; require experts to certify no unverified AI assistance.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Expert reports were prepared with AI assistance that introduced unverified or incorrect citations and inserted wording (e.g., the phrase 'minimum necessary'); Mr Reilly corrected some AI-generated citations and authors could not confirm citation accuracy. Outcome: Tribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight. The Agency raised concerns that several expert reports were prepared with assistance of an artificial intelligence program and contained unverified citations and inserted text. The Tribunal noted admissions by at least one practitioner (Ms McPhee) that AI assisted drafting and found instances where citations had been corrected by another witness and where the author could not confirm whether AI added certain phrases. The Tribunal criticised the lack of independent verification and gave the reports reduced weight but did not impose sanctions.
Operational lesson
Expert reports drafted with AI got reduced evidentiary weight; require experts to certify no unverified AI assistance.
Record details
CourtAdministrative Review Tribunal
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateAug 28, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typeExpert
OutcomeTribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Tribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight
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.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Expert reports were prepared with AI assistance that introduced unverified or incorrect citations and inserted wording (e.g., the phrase 'minimum necessary'); Mr Reilly corrected some AI-generated citations and authors could not confirm citation accuracy.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Butler and National Disability Insurance Agency?
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Expert reports were prepared with AI assistance that introduced unverified or incorrect citations and inserted wording (e.g., the phrase 'minimum necessary'); Mr Reilly corrected some AI-generated citations and authors could not confirm citation accuracy. Outcome: Tribunal criticised the reliability of AI-assisted expert reports and gave them reduced weight. The Agency raised concerns that several expert reports were prepared with assistance of an artificial intelligence program and contained unverified citations and inserted text.…
- Why does Butler and National Disability Insurance Agency matter for legal AI risk?
- Expert reports drafted with AI got reduced evidentiary weight; require experts to certify no unverified AI assistance.
- What does the public record establish about Butler and National Disability Insurance Agency?
- 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 Butler and National Disability Insurance Agency 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.