Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd
Haifa Labour Court · Sep 29, 2025
What happened in this matter?
The Haifa Labour Court sanctioned counsel for submitting twenty fabricated citations generated by AI. The court rejected counsel's medical justification for the error and ordered the plaintiff to pay 2,000 ILS in costs to the defendant, citing the significant burden placed on the defense to verify and address the non-existent authorities.
- Why the court cared
- The court reasoned that the volume of twenty fabricated citations precluded a finding of good faith. It further noted that the defense was forced to expend significant effort to address these non-existent cases, and that counsel failed to disclose the error until after a specific court order, despite prior opportunities to do so.
- Why it matters now
- Twenty fabricated citations draw four-figure fines in Israeli labour courts; volume of errors directly scales penalty.
Why this matter is tracked
In Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd., the Haifa Labour Court sanctioned counsel for including twenty fabricated case citations in the original pleading. Counsel attributed the error to AI usage necessitated by medical circumstances, but the court rejected this explanation, noting the lack of supporting documentation and the failure to acknowledge the errors until prompted by a court order. The court emphasized that the defense was forced to expend significant effort to address the non-existent authorities throughout the lengthy pleading. Finding the conduct a serious lapse that caused unnecessary burden to the opposing party, the court ordered the plaintiff to pay 2,000 ILS in costs, independent of the final outcome of the litigation.
Twenty fabricated citations draw four-figure fines in Israeli labour courts; volume of errors directly scales penalty.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
Counsel admitted to using AI for the pleading.
Decision on costs following the court's prior order regarding the plaintiff's failure to verify citations.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Twenty fabricated citations
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd?
- The Haifa Labour Court sanctioned counsel for submitting twenty fabricated citations generated by AI. The court rejected counsel's medical justification for the error and ordered the plaintiff to pay 2,000 ILS in costs to the defendant, citing the significant burden placed on the defense to verify and address the non-existent authorities.
- Why does Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd matter for legal AI risk?
- Twenty fabricated citations draw four-figure fines in Israeli labour courts; volume of errors directly scales penalty.
- What does the public record establish about Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd?
- 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.
- Which source supports this Sonkin v. Roll Profile Ltd summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.