Loading AI Vortex evidence…
Preparing the requested public record.
Public trackerEvidence checked Jul 23, 2026 · Latest decision Jul 21, 2026Public incidents are risk signals, not usage-adjusted rates
Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 86/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.
The Vancor Group Inc. v. 2744364 Ontario Limited et al
Ontario SCJ · Oct 28, 2025
CanadaEditorial impact: lowpro sefake citationsmisrepresented authorityadministrative
Direct answer
What happened in this matter?
Fabricated: Case Law | Monitor identified and court found that 'Valgardson v. British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 20' does not exist; cited by Mr. Schaller in his factum and characterized as an AI-generated fabricated case. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why the court cared
- Fabricated: Case Law | Monitor identified and court found that 'Valgardson v. British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 20' does not exist; cited by Mr. Schaller in his factum and characterized as an AI-generated fabricated case. || Misrepresented: Case Law | Mr. Schaller cited 'Wallace v. Crates Marine Sales Ltd. 2014 ONSC 3124' for a proposition about balancing fairness/efficiency/access to justice; the court noted the cited decision does not exist as cited and the actual similar authority (Wallace v. Crate’s Marine Sales Ltd., 2014 ONCA 671) does not stand for that proposition. || Fabricated: Other | Monitor flagged a number of other authorities cited by Mr. Schaller that either could not be found or did not support the propositions for which they were cited.
- Why it matters now
- Monitor review still catches AI fabrications — expect your factum to be audited line by line.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Case Law | Monitor identified and court found that 'Valgardson v. British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 20' does not exist; cited by Mr. Schaller in his factum and characterized as an AI-generated fabricated case. Outcome: Admonishment.
Operational lesson
Monitor review still catches AI fabrications — expect your factum to be audited line by line.
Record details
CourtOntario SCJ
Jurisdictioninternational
CircuitNot recorded
DateOct 28, 2025
UN
AI toolUnidentified
Party typePro Se Litigant
OutcomeAdmonishment
Known amountNot recorded
Professional sanctionNo
Attribution boundary
What the record establishes about AI use
not established
The current record does not establish a specific AI tool. Do not infer AI use beyond the source.
Procedural posture
Admonishment
Correction behavior
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
3 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Case Law | Monitor identified and court found that 'Valgardson v. British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 20' does not exist; cited by Mr. Schaller in his factum and characterized as an AI-generated fabricated case.
- Misrepresented: Case Law | Mr. Schaller cited 'Wallace v. Crates Marine Sales Ltd. 2014 ONSC 3124' for a proposition about balancing fairness/efficiency/access to justice; the court noted the cited decision does not exist as cited and the actual similar authority (Wallace v. Crate’s Marine Sales Ltd., 2014 ONCA 671) does not stand for that proposition.
- Fabricated: Other | Monitor flagged a number of other authorities cited by Mr. Schaller that either could not be found or did not support the propositions for which they were cited.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in The Vancor Group Inc. v. 2744364 Ontario Limited et al?
- Fabricated: Case Law | Monitor identified and court found that 'Valgardson v. British Columbia, 2020 BCCA 20' does not exist; cited by Mr. Schaller in his factum and characterized as an AI-generated fabricated case. Outcome: Admonishment.
- Why does The Vancor Group Inc. v. 2744364 Ontario Limited et al matter for legal AI risk?
- Monitor review still catches AI fabrications — expect your factum to be audited line by line.
- What does the public record establish about The Vancor Group Inc. v. 2744364 Ontario Limited et al?
- 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 The Vancor Group Inc. v. 2744364 Ontario Limited et al 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.