Patrick Idim Cyprian v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration
Record source: imported from Damien Charlotin’s AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC BY 4.0), which credits Courtready; document hosted in his archive: open the upstream document. What AI Vortex adds.
IAD · Feb 4, 2026
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Six of seven authorities cited in the appellant's reply could not be found and appeared to be fabricated; counsel admitted the filings were drafted with AI and not verified. Outcome: Submission withdrawn.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies fake citations and misrepresented authority and records Submission withdrawn. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Submission withdrawn in IAD. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Six of seven authorities cited in the appellant's reply could not be found and appeared to be fabricated; counsel admitted the filings were drafted with AI and not verified. Outcome: Submission withdrawn.
This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Submission withdrawn in IAD. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Submission withdrawn
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
2 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Six of seven authorities cited in the appellant's reply could not be found and appeared to be fabricated; counsel admitted the filings were drafted with AI and not verified.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | One cited authority existed but did not relate to the legal principle for which counsel relied, i.e., the precedent was misrepresented.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Patrick Idim Cyprian v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Six of seven authorities cited in the appellant's reply could not be found and appeared to be fabricated; counsel admitted the filings were drafted with AI and not verified. Outcome: Submission withdrawn.
- Why does Patrick Idim Cyprian v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects fake citations and misrepresented authority with Submission withdrawn in IAD. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Patrick Idim Cyprian v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Patrick Idim Cyprian v. Minister of Citizenship and Immigration 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.
Weekly alert: new AI-hallucination court cases
One short email a week with the newly recorded cases, courts and sanctions. Free, no spam, unsubscribe anytime.