NCR v KKB
Court of King’s Bench of Alberta · Jul 9, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Court of King’s Bench of Alberta
- Record ID
- ncr-v-kkb-2025-07-09
- Observed outcome
- The court disregarded the fabricated citations and ordered each party to bear their own costs.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The court disregarded the fabricated citations and declined to award costs to the self-represented litigant. The judge determined that while the submission of unverified authorities was an abuse of process, there was no evidence of an intent to mislead, and therefore no punitive sanctions were imposed beyond the denial of costs.
The court treated unverified authorities as unacceptable and a waste of court resources, but tempered its response because the litigant was self-represented and intent to mislead was not likely on the evidence.
The decision shows a court can distinguish verification failure from deliberate deception while still denying a litigant the cost benefit that might otherwise follow partial success.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Family
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appeal of an arbitration award under the Arbitration Act, heard by the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta.
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 court noted the possibility of AI-generated cases.
English-language Alberta judgment. The court described AI as one possible explanation, not a proven tool use, and did not impose a separate sanction for the citations.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Provide requested copies of authorities promptly when the court asks for verification.
- Use neutral citations and case names that can be independently checked.
- Self-represented litigants should treat AI and web research as starting points, not filing-ready authority.