S. Peggie v. Fife Health & Dr. B. Upton
Employment Tribunal (Scotland) · Dec 8, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Employment Tribunal (Scotland)
- Record ID
- s-peggie-v-fife-health-dr-b-upton-2025-12-08
- Observed outcome
- The Tribunal issued a correction to the judgment regarding the cited case law; the underlying employment claims were adjudicated on their merits.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The case involves allegations that an Employment Tribunal judgment contained fabricated case law citations, which external observers attributed to AI hallucinations. The Tribunal corrected the judgment, attributing the errors to internal judicial correspondence rather than AI, leaving the underlying cause of the citation errors a subject of public debate.
False Quotes: Case Law | One quote from Forstater v CDG Europe and others UKEAT/0105/20 was likely made up (see §791) || False Quotes: Case Law | A second quote was likely made up, this time from Lee v Ashers Baking Co Ltd [2018] UKSC 49 (see § 793)
Even judges are being accused of AI hallucinations; if a quote you filed is challenged, verify and correct before the bench beats you to it.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fabricated Quotes
- Employment
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Reported
- Recorded tool
- AI (implied, unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Final judgment issued by the Employment Tribunal (Scotland) on December 8, 2025, following extensive hearings and deliberations.
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
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
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).
Allegation status: no adjudicated finding is represented by this brief.
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify each cited authority, quotation, and proposition against the underlying source before filing.
- Follow any applicable disclosure and attribution requirements for AI-assisted work.
- Escalate and correct a suspect filing promptly, with a documented response.