Clarke v State of Queensland (Department of Education)
Queensland IRC · Nov 5, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Queensland IRC
- Record ID
- clarke-v-state-of-queensland-department-of-education-2025-11-05
- Observed outcome
- The Respondent's application was granted and the matter was dismissed pursuant to s 541 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld).
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission identified that a pro se litigant submitted fabricated case law and non-existent statutory provisions generated by ChatGPT. The Commission rejected these submissions, noting the authorities could not be located, and dismissed the underlying industrial dispute because the applicant failed to exhaust mandatory internal dispute resolution procedures.
Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited three Commission decisions and quoted passages that could not be located; the court found the authorities were AI-generated and unavailable. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Submissions referred to a non-existent statutory subsection 's 139(6)'; court noted s 139 only has three subsections.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Queensland IRC, with the listed outcome: no adjudicated outcome recorded.
Failure modes and consequences
- Hallucinated_case_law
- Hallucinated_statutory_provisions
- Fabricated_quotes
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Application by the Respondent to strike out proceedings or refrain from hearing the matter pursuant to s 541 of the Industrial Relations Act 2016 (Qld).
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
The applicant admitted to using ChatGPT.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.