HomeCasesThe Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard

Rotterdam D. · Aug 27, 2025

NetherlandsEditorial impact: lowfake citationsmisrepresented authoritytrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | The court noted that the party cited fabricated ECLI numbers " When asked, Dwaard (his lawyer) stated that all this was caused by a problem converting a Word file to PDF. This statement raises questions. The court leaves these questions and the question of whether this violated Article 21 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure unanswered, because, on balance, Dwaard did not benefit from the incorrect representation of the facts in the statement of defense. " (Google Translate)

Why the court cared: The record concerns whether authorities presented to the decision-maker existed and could be verified. The tracked outcome is the response recorded in the linked source; the linked source controls the precise reasoning.
Why it matters now: Blaming 'Word-to-PDF conversion' for fabricated ECLI numbers fooled no one; own the AI use immediately when challenged.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Blaming 'Word-to-PDF conversion' for fabricated ECLI numbers fooled no one; own the AI use immediately when challenged.

Record details

CourtRotterdam D.

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateAug 27, 2025

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeLawyer

OutcomeSee source

Known amountNot recorded

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Procedural posture is not separately recorded in the current dataset.

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | The court noted that the party cited fabricated ECLI numbers
Misrepresented: Case Law | The court noted that some of the cited cases pertained to criminal law decisions, not to trade law jurisprudence

Questions this record answers

What happened in The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard?: Fabricated: Case Law | The court noted that the party cited fabricated ECLI numbers " When asked, Dwaard (his lawyer) stated that all this was caused by a problem converting a Word file to PDF. This statement raises questions. The court leaves these questions and the question of whether this violated Article 21 of the Dutch Code of Civil Procedure unanswered, because, on balance, Dwaard did not benefit from the incorrect representation of the facts in the statement of defense. " (Google Translate)
Why does The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard matter for legal AI risk?: Blaming 'Word-to-PDF conversion' for fabricated ECLI numbers fooled no one; own the AI use immediately when challenged.
What does the public record establish about The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard?: The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded link is a secondary or other public source and should be checked against the docket where available. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Which source supports this The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard summary?: The recorded source is cyberlawyer.nl. It is classified as secondary or other linked source; 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.

Cames et al. v. Lowe's Home CentersM.D. Florida · Jul 16, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Giggs v. Michel (dba Soma MD Advanced Medical Aesthetics)CRT · Jul 16, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)M J Molawa and Others v Matjhabeng Local MunicipalityLabour Court (Durban) · Jul 13, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Birsingh v. Little Wheel, LLC, et al.M.D. Pennsylvania · Jul 10, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)John P. Chapman v. Officer Decker et al.S.D. Illinois · Jul 10, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Burlingame v. Argo Private Client Group Ltd, et al.N.D. Ohio · Jul 8, 2026fake citations + misrepresented authority · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)

Linked evidence record

cyberlawyer.nl

Secondary or other linked source
The recorded link is not classified as an official court source or docket mirror.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded link is a secondary or other public source and should be checked against the docket where available. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Blaming 'Word-to-PDF conversion' for fabricated ECLI numbers fooled no one; own the AI use immediately when challenged.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | The court noted that the party cited fabricated ECLI numbers

Misrepresented: Case Law | The court noted that some of the cited cases pertained to criminal law decisions, not to trade law jurisprudence

Questions this record answers

What happened in The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard?

Why does The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard matter for legal AI risk?

Blaming 'Word-to-PDF conversion' for fabricated ECLI numbers fooled no one; own the AI use immediately when challenged.

What does the public record establish about The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard?

Which source supports this The Boys of Rockanje v. Dwaard summary?

The recorded source is cyberlawyer.nl. It is classified as secondary or other linked source; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.