Heneghan v. The Owners, Strata Plan 187
BC CRT · Dec 2, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed the applicant's claims after finding that three case citations submitted by the applicant were non-existent. The tribunal explicitly identified these citations as likely AI-generated 'hallucinations' and disregarded them in its analysis of the strata corporation's authority to remove personal property.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a case citation in support of her argument; tribunal found the case does not exist and concluded it was likely an AI-generated fabrication. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a second case citation; tribunal determined this citation also does not exist and labeled it a likely AI 'hallucination.' || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a third case citation; tribunal found no record of the case and treated it as an AI-generated fabricated authority.
- Why it matters now
- BC Civil Resolution Tribunal is explicitly labeling three-cite fabrications as 'AI hallucinations' in reasons — the record follows the litigant.
Why this matter is tracked
In a dispute before the British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal (CRT) regarding the removal of personal items from common property, the applicant, Jennifer Heneghan, submitted three legal case citations to support her arguments. The tribunal member, Peter Mennie, determined that none of the cited cases exist. The tribunal concluded that these citations were likely 'hallucinations' generated by artificial intelligence. The tribunal ultimately dismissed the applicant's claims, finding that the strata corporation acted within its authority under the Strata Property Act to remove items obstructing common property. The tribunal's decision highlights the risks associated with the use of AI-generated legal research in pro se litigation and the importance of verifying the authenticity of all cited authorities.
BC Civil Resolution Tribunal is explicitly labeling three-cite fabrications as 'AI hallucinations' in reasons — the record follows the litigant.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The tribunal identified the citations as AI-generated hallucinations.
Adjudicated decision by the BC Civil Resolution Tribunal following a review of documentary evidence and written submissions.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a case citation in support of her argument; tribunal found the case does not exist and concluded it was likely an AI-generated fabrication.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a second case citation; tribunal determined this citation also does not exist and labeled it a likely AI 'hallucination.'
- Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant submitted a third case citation; tribunal found no record of the case and treated it as an AI-generated fabricated authority.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Heneghan v. The Owners, Strata Plan 187?
- The BC Civil Resolution Tribunal dismissed the applicant's claims after finding that three case citations submitted by the applicant were non-existent. The tribunal explicitly identified these citations as likely AI-generated 'hallucinations' and disregarded them in its analysis of the strata corporation's authority to remove personal property.
- Why does Heneghan v. The Owners, Strata Plan 187 matter for legal AI risk?
- BC Civil Resolution Tribunal is explicitly labeling three-cite fabrications as 'AI hallucinations' in reasons — the record follows the litigant.
- What does the public record establish about Heneghan v. The Owners, Strata Plan 187?
- 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 Heneghan v. The Owners, Strata Plan 187 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.