Crypto Open Patent Alliance v. Wright (2)
UK · May 12, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- UK
- Record ID
- crypto-open-patent-alliance-v-wright-2-2025-05-12
- Observed outcome
- General Civil Restraint Order (GCRO) granted for 3 years; case referred to the Attorney General; costs of £100,000 awarded to applicants.
- Known monetary consequence
- £100,000
Why this matter warrants attention
The court granted a three-year General Civil Restraint Order (GCRO) against Dr. Wright, referred his conduct to the Attorney General for consideration of a civil proceedings order, and ordered him to pay £100,000 in costs. The court found his AI-generated filings contained fabricated authorities and legal nonsense, contributing to a pattern of abusive litigation.
The court found "overwhelming" evidence that Dr. Wright had persistently brought claims that were Totally Without Merit (TWM), numbering far more than the required threshold. This conduct involved extensive lies and forgeries across multiple jurisdictions and targeted individuals who often lacked the resources to defend themselves. The judge concluded there was a "very significant risk" that Dr. Wright would continue this abusive conduct unless restrained. The court noted his consistent contempt for court rules and processes, including his perjury, forgery, breach of orders, and flawed submissions (including those using AI). A GCRO was deemed just and proportionate to protect both potential future litigants and the finite resources of the court system
Pro-se AI filings can trigger GCROs and AG referrals when fabricated authorities accompany a pattern of abuse.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Ip
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT or similar AI engine
- Known monetary consequence
- £100,000
- Procedural posture
- The High Court of Justice (Chancery Division) heard applications for civil restraint orders following findings of contempt and a prior joint trial where Dr. Wright's claims were found to be fabrications.
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 judgment notes documents bore the hallmarks of ChatGPT or similar AI engines.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Escalate unresolved verification failures before filing and preserve the responsible reviewer's signoff record.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to AI (implied, unspecified) output as to any other research input.