HomeCasesCARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 81/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)

Calgary ARB · Nov 7, 2024

CanadaEditorial impact: lowfake citationsadministrativetrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent identified a legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal (pp. 44-46) that could not be found in standard research sources; the Board gave no weight to the citation and ignored it.

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: Assessment boards escalate repeat AI fakes to the General Chair — three unverifiable cites is one too many.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Assessment boards escalate repeat AI fakes to the General Chair — three unverifiable cites is one too many.

Record details

CourtCalgary ARB

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateNov 7, 2024

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeSee source

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent identified a legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal (pp. 44-46) that could not be found in standard research sources; the Board gave no weight to the citation and ignored it.
Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent challenged a second legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal as unauthoritative and not locatable; Complainant could not confirm authenticity and the Board excluded it from consideration.
Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent challenged a third legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal as likely generated by an AI tool and not found in standard sources; the Board refused to rely on it and referred the issue to the General Chair.

Questions this record answers

What happened in CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)?: Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent identified a legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal (pp. 44-46) that could not be found in standard research sources; the Board gave no weight to the citation and ignored it.
Why does CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board) matter for legal AI risk?: Assessment boards escalate repeat AI fakes to the General Chair — three unverifiable cites is one too many.
What does the public record establish about CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)?: 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 CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board) 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.

Recurso de Suplicación 0005472/2025T.S.X. Galicia · Jul 7, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)14095863 Canada Inc v Moosehead Breweries LimitedTrademarks Opposition Board · Jul 3, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Chilly Moose Ltd. v Moosehead Breweries LimitedTrademarks Opposition Board · Jun 29, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Moosehead Breweries Limited v 14095863 Canada Inc.Trademarks Opposition Board · Jun 29, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)K.W. v. Ringwood Board of EducationD. New Jersey · Jun 16, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Djybril Voukeng Djatsa v. Minister of Citizenship and ImmigrationFederal Court · Jun 4, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Assessment boards escalate repeat AI fakes to the General Chair — three unverifiable cites is one too many.

Tracked discrepancy record

3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent challenged a second legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal as unauthoritative and not locatable; Complainant could not confirm authenticity and the Board excluded it from consideration.

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent challenged a third legal citation in the Complainant's rebuttal as likely generated by an AI tool and not found in standard sources; the Board refused to rely on it and referred the issue to the General Chair.

Questions this record answers

What happened in CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)?

Why does CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board) matter for legal AI risk?

Assessment boards escalate repeat AI fakes to the General Chair — three unverifiable cites is one too many.

What does the public record establish about CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board)?

Which source supports this CARB 188903M-2024 (Calgary Assessment Review Board) 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.