DJ v SN
CA Alberta · Nov 19, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The Court of Appeal of Alberta imposed a $500 cost sanction on a self-represented litigant for including three AI-generated, non-existent legal authorities in her appellate factum. The court held that this conduct violated established practice notices regarding the use of large language models and warranted a monetary penalty to uphold the integrity of court proceedings.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's factum cited three non-existent authorities generated by AI; appellant admitted at hearing they were AI-generated and the court imposed additional costs.
- Why it matters now
- Admission of AI use at hearing now draws cost orders — counsel who conceal face far worse.
Why this matter is tracked
In an appeal before the Court of Appeal of Alberta, the self-represented appellant included three non-existent legal authorities in her factum. During the hearing, the appellant admitted these citations were generated using artificial intelligence tools. The Court noted that this conduct violated the Alberta Courts' October 2023 Notice to the Public and Legal Profession regarding the use of large language models. Citing the need to maintain the integrity and credibility of court processes, the Court dismissed the appeal and ordered the appellant to pay an additional $500 in costs to the respondent, emphasizing that future failures to comply with the Notice by self-represented litigants may result in more substantial penalties.
Admission of AI use at hearing now draws cost orders — counsel who conceal face far worse.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The appellant acknowledged the authorities were generated through her use of AI tools.
Appellate review of a chambers decision regarding parenting and child support orders.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant's factum cited three non-existent authorities generated by AI; appellant admitted at hearing they were AI-generated and the court imposed additional costs.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in DJ v SN?
- The Court of Appeal of Alberta imposed a $500 cost sanction on a self-represented litigant for including three AI-generated, non-existent legal authorities in her appellate factum. The court held that this conduct violated established practice notices regarding the use of large language models and warranted a monetary penalty to uphold the integrity of court proceedings.
- Why does DJ v SN matter for legal AI risk?
- Admission of AI use at hearing now draws cost orders — counsel who conceal face far worse.
- What does the public record establish about DJ v SN?
- 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 DJ v SN 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.