N… R… c. M… S…
Québec SC · Feb 18, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Québec SC
- Record ID
- n-r-c-m-s-2026-02-18
- Observed outcome
- The court rejected the defendant's motion to disqualify the children's lawyer and issued a formal warning regarding the defendant's use of AI to fabricate evidence and legal authorities.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court issued a formal warning to the pro se defendant for using AI to fabricate case law, misrepresent statutes, and invent false quotations in court filings. The court explicitly cautioned that future instances of such conduct would lead to more severe sanctions, including potential financial penalties.
False Quotes: Exhibits & Submissions | Partial fabrication/manipulation of a quotation attributed to the DPJ; the court reviewed the records and could not find the quoted wording as presented. || Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Pure fabrication of a quotation attributed to the children's lawyer (Me Dupont); court could not find the quote in any filed documents. || Fabricated: Case Law | Cited a non-existent decision of the Court of Appeal; court could not locate the decision and the defendant later admitted using AI in preparing his materials. || Misrepresented: Legal Norm | Misstates or invents wording of legislative articles, citing inapplicable provisions or inventing libellés, which misled the court in parts of the motion.
Pro-se family filer admitted AI use after challenge; non-attorney status kept sanctions to a warning.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Case Law
- Fabricated Quotations
- Misrepresented Legal Norms
- Misleading The Court
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The court ruled on two incidental motions: a motion to disqualify the children's lawyer and a motion to declare the defendant a vexatious litigant, following an audience held on February 3, 2026.
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
The judgment does not name the specific AI tool.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Escalate and correct a suspect filing promptly, with a documented response.