Mr D Rollo v. Marstons Trading Ltd
Employment Tribunal · Aug 1, 2024
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Employment Tribunal
- Record ID
- mr-d-rollo-v-marstons-trading-ltd-2024-08-01
- Observed outcome
- Claim dismissed; AI material excluded from evidence under prior judicial order; no sanction but explicit judicial criticism
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Claimant argued the disclosure schedule had to adhere to Article 28 GDPR; the court held no such requirement exists in Tribunal Rules and could not see any breach. Outcome: Claim dismissed; AI material excluded from evidence under prior judicial order; no sanction but explicit judicial criticism.
The Tribunal held that "a record of a ChatGPT discussion would not in my judgment be evidence that could sensibly be described as expert evidence nor could it be deemed reliable"
ChatGPT conversation logs are not expert evidence; tribunals will exclude them outright.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Misrepresented Authority
- Employment
- Trial
- Case Dismissed
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Claim dismissed; AI material excluded from evidence under prior judicial order; no sanction but explicit judicial criticism
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
ChatGPT is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to ChatGPT output as to any other research input.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.