Shakori v Tern, 2025 ONLTB 31233
LTB (Ontario) · May 26, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- LTB (Ontario)
- Record ID
- shakori-v-tern-2025-onltb-31233-2025-05-26
- Observed outcome
- The Board determined the Residential Tenancies Act applies to the tenancy effective October 13, 2024, after disregarding the tenant's AI-generated case law.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The Ontario Landlord and Tenant Board could not locate the case references given at the hearing; a post-hearing submission said they were found using ChatGPT. The adjudicator noted that ChatGPT can create fictitious information, found the cases not instructive and decided the matter on other evidence without imposing sanctions.
The adjudicator took judicial notice that ChatGPT is known to create fictitious information and found the provided citations were never located, rendering them not instructive to the decision.
Tenant's ChatGPT-sourced case references could not be located and were not instructive; no sanction imposed.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- Adjudicated order issued by the Landlord and Tenant Board (Ontario) following a hearing on April 15, 2025, to determine the applicability of the Residential Tenancies Act.
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 tenant admitted using ChatGPT for case references.
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
- Verify the existence and accuracy of all legal citations through reliable, primary legal databases.
- Do not rely on generative AI tools for legal research or case law retrieval without independent verification.
- Be prepared to address the provenance of legal authorities if challenged by the opposing party or the tribunal.