Vasina v. York Condominium Corporation No. 486
ONCAT · Jan 12, 2026
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- ONCAT
- Record ID
- vasina-v-york-condominium-corporation-no-486-2026-01-12
- Observed outcome
- The application was partially successful; the Tribunal found a technical refusal regarding the timing of certain records but declined to award penalties or costs, ordering each party to bear their own expenses.
- Known monetary consequence
- CA$0
Why this matter warrants attention
The Tribunal found that the self-represented Applicant submitted arguments based on non-existent case law and fabricated statutory requirements, which the Tribunal explicitly attributed to the use of an AI platform. The Tribunal disregarded these hallucinated submissions and cautioned that all parties are responsible for the accuracy of their filings.
Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited this case; Tribunal found no record of it and stated it does not exist and cannot be relied upon. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited this case; Tribunal found no record of it and stated it does not exist and cannot be relied upon. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited this case; Tribunal found no record of it and stated it does not exist and cannot be relied upon. || Fabricated: Case Law | Applicant cited this case; Tribunal found no record of it and stated it does not exist and cannot be relied upon. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | Applicant referred to requirements for forms purportedly mandated by statute; Tribunal found these requirements are not set out in the Act or any legislation and cannot be relied upon.
Condo tribunals are seeing repeat AI hallucination patterns—flag prior fabricator filings when you spot the same filer.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Explicitly Recorded
- Recorded tool
- AI platform (unspecified)
- Known monetary consequence
- CA$0
- Procedural posture
- Adjudicated decision by the Condominium Authority Tribunal following a written online hearing held between August 11, 2025, and December 18, 2025.
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
Tribunal attributed arguments to an AI platform.
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.