Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
Hogan v. Treasury Board
Federal PSLREB · Oct 1, 2025
CanadaEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesmisrepresented authority
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
False Quotes: Legal Norm | Complainant repeatedly quoted an invented version of s.129(6) of the Canada Labour Code to claim entitlement to continued wages; the Board noted the quoted wording is fabricated and irrelevant because no directions were made by the Head.
- Why the court cared
- The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
- Why it matters now
- AI fabricates statutory text, not just cases; verify the actual wording of every section quoted.
Why this matter is tracked
False Quotes: Legal Norm | Complainant repeatedly quoted an invented version of s.129(6) of the Canada Labour Code to claim entitlement to continued wages; the Board noted the quoted wording is fabricated and irrelevant because no directions were made by the Head.
Operational lesson
AI fabricates statutory text, not just cases; verify the actual wording of every section quoted.
Record details
CourtFederal PSLREB
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateOct 1, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
reported
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Procedural posture
Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
10 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- False Quotes: Legal Norm | Complainant repeatedly quoted an invented version of s.129(6) of the Canada Labour Code to claim entitlement to continued wages; the Board noted the quoted wording is fabricated and irrelevant because no directions were made by the Head.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complainant cited 'Merriweather v. Canada (Attorney General), 2012 FC 109', which the Board states does not exist.
- Fabricated: Doctrinal Work | Complainant relied on a 'H&S Officer Training Module - Labour Program, 2018 edition' that the Board could not locate and treats as non-existent.
- Outdated Advice: Repealed Law | Complainant relied on ss. 22 and 44 of the (former) FPSLRA to claim broad remedial/interim powers; the Board noted those sections were repealed in 2013 and did not say what the complainant attributed to them.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complainant cited 'Fanning v. Treasury Board, 2023 FPSLREB 12', which the Board states does not exist.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complainant cited 'Vancouver v. CUPE, 2006 SCC 27', which the Board states does not exist.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Complainant cited 'Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Canada (AG), 2018 FCA 12', which the Board states does not exist.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Complainant relied on IWA v. Consolidated-Bathurst Packaging Ltd., [1990] 1 SCR 282 for the proposition that administrative tribunals have authority to grant interim relief; the Board noted the case does not address interim relief and was mischaracterized.
Show 2 additional discrepancies
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Complainant relied on Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd., 2016 SCC 29 for the proposition that tribunals can grant interim relief; the Board found this to be a mischaracterization of that decision.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Complainant claimed White v. Treasury Board (Correctional Service of Canada), 2022 FPSLREB 52 supported interim wage orders; the Board observed that decision did not order interim relief and the complainant misrepresented it.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Hogan v. Treasury Board?
- False Quotes: Legal Norm | Complainant repeatedly quoted an invented version of s.129(6) of the Canada Labour Code to claim entitlement to continued wages; the Board noted the quoted wording is fabricated and irrelevant because no directions were made by the Head.
- Why does Hogan v. Treasury Board matter for legal AI risk?
- AI fabricates statutory text, not just cases; verify the actual wording of every section quoted.
- What does the public record establish about Hogan v. Treasury Board?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Hogan v. Treasury Board 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.