Credit One Finance Limited v Cheung Yiu Cho & another
District Court · Mar 20, 2026
What happened in this matter?
False Quotes: Case Law | D2 attributed an estoppel proposition to paragraph 58 of Lam Ka Kui v Choi Yuen Ling, but the cited paragraph contains a discussion of the plaintiff’s opportunity to have a power of attorney prepared and does not state the quoted proposition. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records Adverse Costs Order. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in District Court. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
False Quotes: Case Law | D2 attributed an estoppel proposition to paragraph 58 of Lam Ka Kui v Choi Yuen Ling, but the cited paragraph contains a discussion of the plaintiff’s opportunity to have a power of attorney prepared and does not state the quoted proposition. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in District Court. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
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.
Adverse Costs Order
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
5 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- False Quotes: Case Law | D2 attributed an estoppel proposition to paragraph 58 of Lam Ka Kui v Choi Yuen Ling, but the cited paragraph contains a discussion of the plaintiff’s opportunity to have a power of attorney prepared and does not state the quoted proposition.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | D2 claimed that exhibit HB/736 was a 2024 handwritten statement by D1 confirming that D2 funded the property and would own it after 15 years of payments; the court found that HB/736 was actually D1’s affidavit dated 1 June 2022 and contained no such statement.
- Misrepresented: Exhibits & Submissions | D2 claimed that A-6 contained 42 bank deposit slips covering 2000–2015, all bearing her signature and bank stamps; the court found that only 37 slips were produced, they lacked bank stamps, and they did not cover the asserted continuous 15-year period.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | D2 claimed that A-12 to A-14 contained 156 water, electricity, gas, rates, and related bills from 2000 to 2024; the court found that the trial bundle contained no such 156 documents.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | D2 claimed that her testimony at HB/576 paragraphs 12–15 recorded an agreement that she would fully fund the purchase and mortgage and receive ownership; the court found that HB/576–578 were her 7 January 2025 affidavit and contained neither the cited paragraphs nor the alleged content.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Credit One Finance Limited v Cheung Yiu Cho & another?
- False Quotes: Case Law | D2 attributed an estoppel proposition to paragraph 58 of Lam Ka Kui v Choi Yuen Ling, but the cited paragraph contains a discussion of the plaintiff’s opportunity to have a power of attorney prepared and does not state the quoted proposition. Outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
- Why does Credit One Finance Limited v Cheung Yiu Cho & another matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects pro se and fake citations with Adverse Costs Order in District Court. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Credit One Finance Limited v Cheung Yiu Cho & another?
- 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 Credit One Finance Limited v Cheung Yiu Cho & another 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.