Riley Pollard v UNIFOR Local 324
Ontario LRB · Jan 6, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Ontario LRB
- Record ID
- riley-pollard-v-unifor-local-324-2026-01-06
- Observed outcome
- The Board dismissed the union's objections, denied the request to call additional witnesses, and ordered the ballot box to be opened and counted.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Board acknowledged the union's allegation that the applicant used AI to generate submissions with non-existent or mischaracterized rules. The Board did not sanction the applicant, finding that the rules central to the case were correctly cited and choosing to ignore other inaccurate citations.
Fabricated: Legal Norm | Opposing party alleged Mr. Pollard's written submissions included references to Board Rules that did not exist or were mischaracterized; Board noted the allegation, found Rules 2.4 and 5.1 were properly cited, and ignored other inaccurate rule citations.
Boards will ignore mischaracterized rule citations rather than sanction pro-se filers; volume filler risk.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Alleged
- Recorded tool
- Large Language Model (LLM) or Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The Board addressed the union's allegations of AI-assisted submission errors during a hearing regarding the admissibility of additional witnesses and the potential dismissal of a termination application.
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 union alleged the applicant used an LLM or 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.