Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-13ZK98AGenerated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Greenwood v. The Owners, Strata Plan

BC CRT · Jan 5, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
BC CRT
Record ID
greenwood-v-the-owners-strata-plan-2026-01-05
Observed outcome
Most claims dismissed; partial success on lien fee removal.
Known monetary consequence
CA$656
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The tribunal dismissed most of the applicant's claims, finding she failed to prove the strata received her cheques. However, the tribunal granted partial relief by ordering the strata to remove a lien administration fee from the applicant's account, as the strata failed to justify the charge under the Strata Property Act.

Why the decision-maker cared

The tribunal member determined that the applicant's citations of non-existent CRT cases and incorrect statutory sections were likely AI-generated hallucinations. Relying on precedent (AQ v. BW, 2025 BCCRT 907), the tribunal held it was not required to address arguments lacking a basis in law. Regarding the lien, the tribunal applied the principle from Kim v. Section 1 of The Owners, Strata Plan LMS 1866 (2022 BCCRT 1197), finding that a strata corporation cannot charge a lien administration fee without providing a specific explanation for the fee's nature.

Why it matters now

Tribunals silently discount entire arguments when AI-generated citations permeate submissions.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Misrepresented Authority
  • Administrative
  • Trial
  • Case Dismissed
AI attribution
Implied
Recorded tool
AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
CA$656
Procedural posture
Adjudicated decision by the Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) following a written hearing.
PRIMARY SOURCE

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open underlying source

A recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.

EVIDENCE BOUNDARY

What this record does—and does not—establish

The tribunal identified the applicant's citations as likely AI-generated.

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).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.