Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited v. Gstaad Hotels Private Limited
Supreme Court · Dec 8, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Supreme Court
- Record ID
- omkara-assets-reconstruction-private-limited-v-gstaad-hotels-private-limited-202
- Observed outcome
- Warning (during hearing)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The public record identifies a December 8, 2025 Supreme Court of India hearing in Omkara Assets Reconstruction Private Limited v. Gstaad Hotels Private Limited in which fabricated case law was identified and counsel received a warning during the hearing; no monetary sanction is recorded.
Fabricated: Case Law
Indian Supreme Court is openly warning counsel on AI-fabricated authorities mid-hearing; assume zero tolerance in apex courts.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Trial
- Warning
- AI attribution
- Not Established
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Warning (during hearing)
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 current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
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: Metadata Only (medium confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Set a written rule for permissible AI use and mandatory verification.