AI VORTEXLEGAL AI RISK
AI visibilityConsultingSearch free
Public trackerCorpus refreshed Sep 10, 2026 · Latest decision Sep 8, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
HomeCasesTA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907
Evidence review: primary document verified. The linked primary document was extracted and checked with page-level evidence locators.
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 86/100. It passes the current publication gate; that is not a legal-editorial review or a guarantee that every field has been independently verified.
Corpus matter record

TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907

TA Orléans · Jan 7, 2026

FranceEditorial impact: lowfake citationsadministrativetrialWarning
Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

The court admonished counsel for submitting multiple non-existent legal citations in their pleadings. The judge explicitly identified these as potential AI-generated 'hallucinations' and ordered counsel to verify all future references before filing, emphasizing the professional obligation to ensure the authenticity of legal authorities presented to the tribunal.

Why the court cared
Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 27 juin 2019, n°420269'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 12 octobre 2012, GISTI et FAPIL, n° 34728'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 9 juin 1978, Lebon, n° 05873'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references. || Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CAA Lyon, 18 janvier 2022, n° 20LY01957'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references.
Why it matters now
French administrative courts now admonish counsel by name for unverified Conseil d'Etat citations; verify every reference pre-filing.

Why this matter is tracked

In a challenge to an administrative order regarding residency and deportation, the Tribunal administratif d'Orléans identified that counsel for the applicant submitted multiple fabricated legal citations in their pleadings. The court explicitly noted that several cited decisions, including 'CE, 27 juin 2019, n°420269' and 'CAA Lyon, 18 janvier 2022, n° 20LY01957', do not exist. The court admonished counsel for failing to verify the authenticity of these references, explicitly warning against the use of AI-generated 'hallucinations' or 'confabulations' in legal filings. While the court partially granted the applicant's request to annul specific administrative measures regarding departure delays and house arrest, it issued a formal reprimand to counsel regarding the integrity of the cited legal authorities.

Operational lesson

French administrative courts now admonish counsel by name for unverified Conseil d'Etat citations; verify every reference pre-filing.

Record details

CourtTA Orléans
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateJan 7, 2026
AI
AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)
Party typeLawyer
OutcomeThe court partially annulled the administrative orders regarding departure delays and house arrest, while formally admonishing counsel for the use of fabricated legal citations.
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionFormal judicial admonishment of counsel for failing to verify legal citations.
Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

implied

The court refers to the citations as 'hallucinations' or 'confabulations', implying the use of generative AI.

Procedural posture

Administrative litigation concerning an obligation to leave French territory and house arrest, resulting in a partial annulment of administrative measures and a formal judicial admonishment of counsel.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

4 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

  1. Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 27 juin 2019, n°420269'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references.
  2. Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 12 octobre 2012, GISTI et FAPIL, n° 34728'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references.
  3. Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CE, 9 juin 1978, Lebon, n° 05873'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references.
  4. Fabricated: Case Law | Counsel cited 'CAA Lyon, 18 janvier 2022, n° 20LY01957'; the court found that this decision does not exist and urged verification of references.

Questions this record answers

What happened in TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907?
The court admonished counsel for submitting multiple non-existent legal citations in their pleadings. The judge explicitly identified these as potential AI-generated 'hallucinations' and ordered counsel to verify all future references before filing, emphasizing the professional obligation to ensure the authenticity of legal authorities presented to the tribunal.
Why does TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907 matter for legal AI risk?
French administrative courts now admonish counsel by name for unverified Conseil d'Etat citations; verify every reference pre-filing.
What does the public record establish about TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907?
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.
Which source supports this TA Orléans, Reconduite à la frontière, n° 2506907 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.

N° 2506461TA Orléans · Dec 29, 2025same court · fake citations + administrativePhilippeaux v. United States, et al.S.D. New York · Sep 8, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Perry v. Social Security Administration, CommissionerN.D. Alabama · Aug 3, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)The JAAW Group, LLCGAO · Jul 31, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Alexander M. v. Frank BisignanoD. Maine · Jul 28, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Toronto Standard Condominium Corporation No. 2143 v. RobibaroOntario Condominium Authority Tribunal · Jul 28, 2026fake citations + administrative · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)