Pinchas v. Supervisor of Insolvency
Jerusalem Magistrate's Court · Aug 3, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Jerusalem Magistrate's Court
- Record ID
- pinchas-v-supervisor-of-insolvency-2025-08-03
- Observed outcome
- The court imposed a monetary sanction of 1,000 ILS payable to the state treasury.
- Known monetary consequence
- ₪1,000
Why this matter warrants attention
The Jerusalem Magistrate's Court sanctioned a pro se litigant 1,000 ILS for submitting a motion containing AI-generated fabricated case law and statutes. The court held that the litigant's subsequent withdrawal of the motion did not purge the misconduct, as the act of filing the unverified, misleading content itself warranted a sanction for wasting judicial time.
The court reasoned that the litigant's submission of AI-generated content containing non-existent legal authorities constituted improper conduct that wasted judicial time. The judge explicitly stated that the litigant's withdrawal of the motion after being confronted did not absolve them of responsibility, as the duty to verify filings remains with the party regardless of their pro se status.
Withdrawing the motion does not purge the sanction — Israeli courts punish the filing, not just reliance at hearing.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Bankruptcy
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- ₪1,000
- Procedural posture
- Decision on multiple open issues in a bankruptcy appeal, including a motion for fee exemption and procedural conduct.
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 mentions the use of artificial intelligence without naming a specific tool.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Implement mandatory verification protocols for all legal citations and statutes, regardless of the source of the draft.
- Establish a policy that withdrawal of a motion does not preclude judicial review of the conduct associated with its filing.
- Ensure that pro se litigants or junior staff are trained on the risks of AI-generated hallucinations in legal research.