Thabize c. Immobilière montérégienne IMR inc.
TAL · Mar 6, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- TAL
- Record ID
- thabize-c-immobilière-montérégienne-imr-inc-2026-03-06
- Observed outcome
- The tribunal rejected the tenant's request for retraction and imposed a procedural limitation, prohibiting the tenant from filing further requests in the dossier without prior authorization.
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
Why this matter warrants attention
The tribunal identified that the tenant cited non-existent jurisprudence, which it attributed to artificial intelligence. As a result, the tribunal rejected the tenant's meritless retraction request and imposed a procedural limitation, requiring the tenant to obtain prior authorization before filing any further requests in the case.
Fabricated: Case Law | Tenant cited a purported decision 'Événtail Habitation inc. c. X, 2023 QCTAL 150'; tribunal (citing opposing party's point) found the jurisprudence unlocatable and likely produced by artificial intelligence.
This record documents a Pro Se Litigant filing issue in TAL, with the listed outcome: Further filings barred without prior authorization.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- Bar Referral
- AI attribution
- Implied
- Recorded tool
- AI (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- Not recorded
- Procedural posture
- The matter came before the TAL on a tenant's request for retraction of a December 15, 2025, decision, following a hearing on February 19, 2026.
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 explicitly referenced artificial intelligence as the likely source of the fabricated citation.
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.