HomeCasesKIO 3342/25

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.

Corpus matter record

KIO 3342/25

Krajowa Izba Odwoławcza · Oct 17, 2025

PolandEditorial impact: lowfake citationsmisrepresented authoritytrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Submission included invented individual tax interpretations cited to specific reference numbers which could not be found; the Izba found these references to be false and likely AI-generated. Outcome: Exclusion from procurement.

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is Exclusion from procurement; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority involving Unidentified with Exclusion from procurement in Krajowa Izba Odwoławcza, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority involving Unidentified with Exclusion from procurement in Krajowa Izba Odwoławcza, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtKrajowa Izba Odwoławcza

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateOct 17, 2025

AI toolUnidentified

Party typeExpert

OutcomeExclusion from procurement

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

not established

The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.

Procedural posture

Exclusion from procurement

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Submission included invented individual tax interpretations cited to specific reference numbers which could not be found; the Izba found these references to be false and likely AI-generated.
Misrepresented: Legal Norm | The submission repeated an incorrect PKWiU code and misattributed a reduced 8% VAT rate to services where that classification was erroneous; the court treated these assertions as misleading/misrepresentations in the explanations.

Questions this record answers

What happened in KIO 3342/25?: Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Submission included invented individual tax interpretations cited to specific reference numbers which could not be found; the Izba found these references to be false and likely AI-generated. Outcome: Exclusion from procurement.
Why does KIO 3342/25 matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority involving Unidentified with Exclusion from procurement in Krajowa Izba Odwoławcza, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about KIO 3342/25?: 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 KIO 3342/25 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.

Kevin Leiske et al. v. Robert Gregory Kidd et al.Delaware Ch. · Jul 1, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified Susan Elizabeth Duve v. William Charles Forrest, et al.S.D. Texas · Jun 30, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified Nady v. Al Sadi, 2026 ONSC 3760Ontario SCJ · Jun 26, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified Jacob Doe v. The University of North Carolina System, et al.W.D. North Carolina · Jun 16, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified Amazon.com Inc. et al. v. Kathy Q. Hao et al.W.D. Washington · Jun 15, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified Saini v. Army, Navy & Air Force Veterans in Canada Owls 306Ontario HRT · Jun 15, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: Unidentified

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

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

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

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.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Tracked discrepancy record

2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Misrepresented: Legal Norm | The submission repeated an incorrect PKWiU code and misattributed a reduced 8% VAT rate to services where that classification was erroneous; the court treated these assertions as misleading/misrepresentations in the explanations.

Questions this record answers

What happened in KIO 3342/25?

Why does KIO 3342/25 matter for legal AI risk?

What does the public record establish about KIO 3342/25?

Which source supports this KIO 3342/25 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.