Back to case record
Preview
AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK INTELLIGENCE
CASE BRIEF / REVIEW PACKETAV-CB-1WWW2U2Generated September 11, 2026Evidence checked Sep 10, 2026
TRACKED PUBLIC MATTER

Husni Al Qawasmi Association et al. v. Ziad Oweisat (Sharfi) et al.

Supreme Court · Jan 1, 2026

Jurisdiction
international
Court
Supreme Court
Record ID
husni-al-qawasmi-association-et-al-v-ziad-oweisat-sharfi-et-al-2026-01-01
Observed outcome
The motion was denied, and the respondent was ordered to pay 500 ILS to the state treasury as a sanction for submitting fabricated citations.
Known monetary consequence
₪500
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The Israeli Supreme Court sanctioned a pro se litigant 500 ILS for submitting fabricated legal authorities in a motion. The court explicitly attributed the inclusion of these non-existent citations to the careless use of generative AI tools, warning that such conduct constitutes a serious obstruction of justice.

Why the decision-maker cared

Fabricated: Case Law

Why it matters now

This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in Supreme Court, with the listed outcome: Monetary Sanction.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Pro Se
  • Fake Citations
  • Administrative
  • Trial
  • Monetary
AI attribution
Explicitly Recorded
Recorded tool
Generative AI (unspecified)
Known monetary consequence
₪500
Procedural posture
The court issued a decision denying a motion to amend a judgment and for reconsideration of costs following the dismissal of an appeal.
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 court attributed the fabricated citations to AI hallucinations.

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.
  2. Escalate and correct a suspect filing promptly, with a documented response.