Caso No. 0000140/2025-00
TSJ Gran Canaria (Spain) · Feb 10, 2026
What happened in this matter?
The court sanctioned the lawyer for gross negligence and breach of procedural good faith after he submitted a brief containing 48 AI-generated, fabricated citations. The court initiated a separate disciplinary proceeding and referred the lawyer to the Bar Association for professional misconduct.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Legal Norm | Referencia a una supuesta "Guía de buenas prácticas en la intervención con menores víctimas, 2018" atribuida al CGPJ: no existe constancia de tal guía ni de los datos de publicación alegados. || False Quotes: Case Law | Cita atribuida y textual a la STS 494/2020 que no contiene las palabras atribuidas en el recurso; la sentencia existe pero no incluye el pasaje citado. || False Quotes: Case Law | Cita atribuida a la STS 104/2019 que no existe en el texto de la sentencia (la STS 104/2019 trata del 'caso Caronte' y no de la credibilidad de la víctima). || Misrepresented: Case Law | Numerosas sentencias citadas con número/fecha que no coinciden o que, aunque existen, versan sobre temas distintos al alegado (ej.: STS 282/2019, STS 387/2022, STS 845/2016 entre otras). || Fabricated: Case Law | Cita inexistente o numeración que no corresponde a una sentencia con el contenido alegado (p. ej. STS 798/2022 citada con doctrina sobre destrucción de pruebas, cita inexistente en la base de datos). || Fabricated: Other | Resumen del hallazgo del informe documental: 48 de 52 citas generadas por herramienta de IA y ninguna de las notas textuales reproducidas aparece en las sentencias invocadas.
- Why it matters now
- Forensic report found 48 of 52 citations AI-generated — courts will audit your entire brief when one citation fails.
Why this matter is tracked
In a 2026 appeal, the TSJ Gran Canaria identified that a lawyer submitted a brief containing 48 fabricated or misrepresented citations out of 52 total references. The lawyer admitted to using a paid generative AI tool to conduct legal research without verifying the output. The court found this conduct constituted gross negligence and a breach of the duty of procedural good faith, as the fabricated citations were presented as literal quotes from Supreme Court rulings and non-existent reports. The court emphasized that AI tools are assistive and require mandatory human supervision. Consequently, the court initiated a separate proceeding to address the lawyer's professional responsibility, resulting in a referral to the relevant Bar Association for disciplinary action.
Forensic report found 48 of 52 citations AI-generated — courts will audit your entire brief when one citation fails.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The lawyer admitted to using a paid generative AI tool.
Appellate proceeding before the TSJ Gran Canaria, with a separate disciplinary piece formed to address professional misconduct.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
6 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Legal Norm | Referencia a una supuesta "Guía de buenas prácticas en la intervención con menores víctimas, 2018" atribuida al CGPJ: no existe constancia de tal guía ni de los datos de publicación alegados.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Cita atribuida y textual a la STS 494/2020 que no contiene las palabras atribuidas en el recurso; la sentencia existe pero no incluye el pasaje citado.
- False Quotes: Case Law | Cita atribuida a la STS 104/2019 que no existe en el texto de la sentencia (la STS 104/2019 trata del 'caso Caronte' y no de la credibilidad de la víctima).
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Numerosas sentencias citadas con número/fecha que no coinciden o que, aunque existen, versan sobre temas distintos al alegado (ej.: STS 282/2019, STS 387/2022, STS 845/2016 entre otras).
- Fabricated: Case Law | Cita inexistente o numeración que no corresponde a una sentencia con el contenido alegado (p. ej. STS 798/2022 citada con doctrina sobre destrucción de pruebas, cita inexistente en la base de datos).
- Fabricated: Other | Resumen del hallazgo del informe documental: 48 de 52 citas generadas por herramienta de IA y ninguna de las notas textuales reproducidas aparece en las sentencias invocadas.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Caso No. 0000140/2025-00?
- The court sanctioned the lawyer for gross negligence and breach of procedural good faith after he submitted a brief containing 48 AI-generated, fabricated citations. The court initiated a separate disciplinary proceeding and referred the lawyer to the Bar Association for professional misconduct.
- Why does Caso No. 0000140/2025-00 matter for legal AI risk?
- Forensic report found 48 of 52 citations AI-generated — courts will audit your entire brief when one citation fails.
- What does the public record establish about Caso No. 0000140/2025-00?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Caso No. 0000140/2025-00 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.