Farooq v Commissioner of Police, NSW Police Force
Supreme Court (NSW) · Dec 9, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Supreme Court (NSW)
- Record ID
- farooq-v-commissioner-of-police-nsw-police-force-2025-12-09
- Observed outcome
- Summons dismissed with an adverse costs order pending final submission on costs.
- Known monetary consequence
- A$0
Why this matter warrants attention
The Supreme Court of New South Wales dismissed the plaintiff's summons as misconceived and lacking prospects of success. The court explicitly identified that the plaintiff's AI-assisted submissions contained fabricated case law and misrepresented legal authorities, leading to an adverse costs order against the plaintiff.
Fabricated: Case Law | AI-assisted submissions included citations and quoted documents that do not exist; court observed non-existent cases/documents in the materials. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Other cases cited in the AI-assisted submissions did not stand for the propositions for which they were relied on; authorities were misattributed or misrepresented.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Supreme Court (NSW), with the listed outcome: Adverse Costs Order.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Fabricated Quotes
- Misrepresented Authority
- Administrative
- Trial
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- A$0
- Procedural posture
- Motion to dismiss summons under r 13.4 of the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005 (NSW) and/or s 34 of the Civil and Administrative Tribunals Act 2013 (NSW).
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 the plaintiff used AI but does not name the specific tool.
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.
- Confirm that every authority actually supports the proposition for which it is offered.