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

Lozano González v. Roberge

Housing Administrative Tribunal · May 1, 2025

Jurisdiction
international
Court
Housing Administrative Tribunal
Record ID
lozano-gonzález-v-roberge-2025-05-01
Observed outcome
The Tribunal rejected the landlord's repossession request and denied the tenants' request for damages for an abusive filing.
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
ADVISOR READOUT

Why this matter warrants attention

The Tribunal rejected the landlord's repossession request because the notice was legally invalid. It also declined to sanction the landlord for abuse, concluding that his reliance on an AI-generated translation of the Civil Code of Quebec, while erroneous, did not constitute bad faith or recklessness under the applicable legal standard.

Why the decision-maker cared

The Tribunal reasoned that the landlord's reliance on an AI-generated translation of the Civil Code of Quebec, while resulting in a grave error, did not meet the threshold for 'abuse' or 'recklessness' required to award damages, as the landlord held a sincere belief in his interpretation.

Why it matters now

AI translations of foreign-language statutes are unreliable—always engage qualified counsel for cross-border civil code interpretation.

RECORDED ISSUES

Failure modes and consequences

  • Hallucination
  • Inaccurate_translation
  • Misinterpretation_of_legal_authority
  • Fabricated Quotes
  • Administrative
  • Trial
AI attribution
Admitted
Recorded tool
ChatGPT
Known monetary consequence
Not recorded
Procedural posture
Adjudicated decision by the Housing Administrative Tribunal following a hearing on the landlord's request to repossess a rental property.
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 landlord admitted to using ChatGPT for translation.

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.

Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).

PRACTICAL REVIEW IMPLICATIONS

Controls suggested by the public record

  1. Verify all translations of foreign-language statutes against official or authoritative sources.
  2. Do not rely on generative AI for the interpretation of mandatory legal provisions or procedural requirements.
  3. Ensure that all legal filings are reviewed by qualified counsel to confirm compliance with local law.