Candice Dias v Angle Auto Finance
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0); linked document: austlii.edu.au. What AI Vortex adds.
Fair Work Commission · Jan 20, 2025
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Kenny v Business Council of Australia [2015] FCAFC 75 it had been unable to find a case of that name and citation, with the citation being for a different case,
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- Pro-se AI filings are a map signal, not a firm threat; stay focused on attorney-party cases.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Kenny v Business Council of Australia [2015] FCAFC 75 it had been unable to find a case of that name and citation, with the citation being for a different case,
Pro-se AI filings are a map signal, not a firm threat; stay focused on attorney-party cases.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Kenny v Business Council of Australia [2015] FCAFC 75 it had been unable to find a case of that name and citation, with the citation being for a different case,
- Misrepresented: Case Law | in relation to Yorke v Lucas [2015] FWCFB 6592, there did not appear to be a decision of the Full Bench of the Commission with that name or citation and while there was a High Court case with that name, it dealt with accessorial liability under the Trade Practices Act;
- Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Cowan v Fairfax Media Publications Pty Ltd [2015] FWC 1399, the case could not be located;
- Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Gibbons v Newcastle City Council [2016] FWCFB 3638 there did not appear to be a decision of the Full Bench of the Commission with that name or citation.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Candice Dias v Angle Auto Finance?
- Fabricated: Case Law | in relation to Kenny v Business Council of Australia [2015] FCAFC 75 it had been unable to find a case of that name and citation, with the citation being for a different case,
- Why does Candice Dias v Angle Auto Finance matter for legal AI risk?
- Pro-se AI filings are a map signal, not a firm threat; stay focused on attorney-party cases.
- What does the public record establish about Candice Dias v Angle Auto Finance?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded link is a legal-document or docket mirror. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this Candice Dias v Angle Auto Finance summary?
- The recorded source is austlii.edu.au. It is classified as docket or legal-document mirror; 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.
This record comes from Australia. See AI in Australian courts: practice directions and recorded cases for counts across the corpus and the court guidance on AI.
This record involves a self-represented party. See all pro se litigant AI hallucination decisions in the corpus, with counts by year, country and outcome.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.