Rinaldi v Department of Justice (Right to Information and Privacy)
Queensland CAT · Feb 16, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Queensland CAT
- Record ID
- rinaldi-v-department-of-justice-right-to-information-and-privacy-2026-02-16
- Observed outcome
- Appeal dismissed.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal after identifying that the appellant submitted fabricated case law generated by artificial intelligence. The Tribunal explicitly noted the dangers of using AI for legal research and warned that such conduct risks misleading the court and may constitute contempt.
Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Lutvey v Department of Community Safety'; Tribunal found the case does not appear to exist and noted AI use in submissions. || Fabricated: Case Law | Appellant cited 'Cameron v Department of Environment and Resource Management'; Tribunal found the case does not appear to exist and linked the references to AI generation.
Queensland CAT dismissed the appeal after identifying fabricated cases — pro-se filings get dismissed, not fined.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- Case Dismissed
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- unspecified AI
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Appeal of an Information Commissioner decision to the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal, heard on-papers and dismissed.
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 Tribunal stated the appellant appeared to use AI to generate submissions.
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.