AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesN° 2506461
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 86/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

N° 2506461

TA Orléans · Dec 29, 2025

FranceEditorial impact: lowfake citationsmisrepresented authorityadministrativetrialWarning
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court issued a formal admonishment to the applicant's counsel for submitting a series of fabricated and misrepresented case law citations. The judge explicitly identified multiple non-existent or incorrectly referenced decisions from the Conseil d'État, CNDA, and Administrative Courts of Appeal, warning the counsel of the mandatory requirement to verify all legal authorities before submission.

Why the court cared
Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Lyon decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Paris decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Bordeaux decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Court notes this Conseil d'État decision exists but is not on point for an assignation à résidence (misplaced citation). || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates. || Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
Why it matters now
Mass-fabricated Conseil d'Etat and CNDA citations now earn formal admonishment from French administrative courts.

Why this matter is tracked

In a ruling concerning an immigration matter, the Administrative Tribunal of Orléans annulled several administrative orders issued by the Prefect of Indre-et-Loire against a foreign national. During the proceedings, the court identified that the lawyer representing the applicant had submitted numerous fabricated or misrepresented case law citations in their written submissions. The court explicitly noted that several cited decisions from the Conseil d'État, the CNDA, and various Administrative Courts of Appeal either did not exist or contained mismatched numbers and dates. Consequently, the court issued a formal admonishment to the counsel, emphasizing the professional necessity of verifying all legal authorities before filing them with the court to ensure the integrity of the judicial process.

Operational lesson

Mass-fabricated Conseil d'Etat and CNDA citations now earn formal admonishment from French administrative courts.

Record details

CourtTA Orléans
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateDec 29, 2025
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeThe court annulled the administrative orders against the applicant and issued a formal admonishment to the applicant's counsel regarding the submission of fabricated case law.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionFormal admonishment issued by the court to the counsel for the submission of fabricated legal authorities.
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court refers to references found by 'any means' and the counsel's failure to verify.

Procedural posture

Administrative litigation regarding the annulment of an obligation to leave French territory, an entry ban, and an order of house arrest.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Lyon decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  3. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Paris decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
  4. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  5. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CAA Bordeaux decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
  6. Misrepresented: Case Law | Court notes this Conseil d'État decision exists but is not on point for an assignation à résidence (misplaced citation).
  7. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  8. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
Show 8 additional discrepancies
  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  3. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  4. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  5. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited Conseil d'État decision with number/date does not exist as indicated.
  6. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
  7. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.
  8. Fabricated: Case Law | Court states this cited CNDA decision with number/date does not exist or numbers do not correspond to dates.

Questions this record answers

What happened in N° 2506461?
The court issued a formal admonishment to the applicant's counsel for submitting a series of fabricated and misrepresented case law citations. The judge explicitly identified multiple non-existent or incorrectly referenced decisions from the Conseil d'État, CNDA, and Administrative Courts of Appeal, warning the counsel of the mandatory requirement to verify all legal authorities before submission.
Why does N° 2506461 matter for legal AI risk?
Mass-fabricated Conseil d'Etat and CNDA citations now earn formal admonishment from French administrative courts.
What does the public record establish about N° 2506461?
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.
Which source supports this N° 2506461 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.

TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907TA Orléans · Jan 7, 2026same court · fake citations + administrativePerry v. Social Security Administration, CommissionerN.D. Alabama · Aug 3, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)The JAAW Group, LLCGAO · Jul 31, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)14095863 Canada Inc v Moosehead Breweries LimitedTrademarks Opposition Board · Jul 3, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Chilly Moose Ltd. v Moosehead Breweries LimitedTrademarks Opposition Board · Jun 29, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Moosehead Breweries Limited v 14095863 Canada Inc.Trademarks Opposition Board · Jun 29, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)