AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Oct 27, 2026 · Latest decision Oct 23, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesM.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 80/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.
Corpus matter record

M.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information

Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0), which credits Paweł Kowalski; document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.

WSA w Krakowie · Jun 19, 2026

PolandEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsfabricated quotesadministrativeNone Adjudicated
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The complaint cited decisions by case numbers whose actual decisions were issued on different dates and concerned different issues; the court stated that the cited decisions did not support the propositions attributed to them.

Why the court cared
The structured public record identifies pro se and fake citations and records a recorded judicial or procedural response. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
Why it matters now
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Fabricated: Case Law | The complaint cited decisions by case numbers whose actual decisions were issued on different dates and concerned different issues; the court stated that the cited decisions did not support the propositions attributed to them.

Operational lesson

This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtWSA w Krakowie
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateJun 19, 2026
NO
AI toolNo tool named in source
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeSee source
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

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

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

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | The complaint cited decisions by case numbers whose actual decisions were issued on different dates and concerned different issues; the court stated that the cited decisions did not support the propositions attributed to them.
  2. False Quotes: Case Law | The complaint attributed legal propositions to the cited decisions, but the court found that the quotations or theses did not originate from those decisions.

Questions this record answers

What happened in M.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information?
Fabricated: Case Law | The complaint cited decisions by case numbers whose actual decisions were issued on different dates and concerned different issues; the court stated that the cited decisions did not support the propositions attributed to them.
Why does M.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information matter for legal AI risk?
This matter connects pro se and fake citations with a recorded judicial or procedural response in WSA w Krakowie. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about M.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information?
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 M.W. v. Director of the National Tax Information 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.

Case I SA/Kr 31/26WSA w Krakowie · Feb 23, 2026same court · pro se + fake citationsSabatini v. Pennsylvania Public Utility CommissionC. Pennsylvania · Oct 14, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceMiller v. Colorado Department of RevenueD. Colorado · Sep 30, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceA2501881 (Re)BC WCAT · Aug 6, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceFrancesco Santora v. Copyright Claims BoardCopyright Claims Board · Jul 8, 2025pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in sourceMalone & Anor v Laois County Council & OrsHigh Court · Jun 23, 2025pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: No tool named in source

This record involves a self-represented party. See all pro se litigant AI hallucination decisions in the corpus, with counts by year, country and outcome.

Weekly alert

Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases

One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.