Vivek Singha v. Metal Manufactures
Fair Work Commission · Oct 8, 2025
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Fair Work Commission
- Record ID
- vivek-singha-v-metal-manufactures-2025-10-08
- Observed outcome
- The Commission ordered the applicant to pay $7,689 in costs to the respondent.
- Known monetary consequence
- A$7,689
Why this matter warrants attention
The Fair Work Commission sanctioned a pro se litigant for submitting fabricated case law citations in an unfair dismissal costs proceeding. The Commission confirmed the applicant used AI to generate non-existent precedents and ordered the applicant to pay $7,689 in costs to the respondent.
The Commission determined the applicant's unfair dismissal claim was jurisdictionally barred and had no reasonable prospects of success. Regarding the AI-generated citations, the Commission concurred with the respondent that the cited cases did not exist and noted the applicant's admission of AI usage in his written submissions.
FWC catches fabricated FWC citations instantly; verify every tribunal number before submission.
Failure modes and consequences
- Pro Se
- Fake Citations
- Misrepresented Authority
- Employment
- Trial
- None Adjudicated
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- Unidentified
- Known monetary consequence
- A$7,689
- Procedural posture
- Costs application following the dismissal of an unfair dismissal claim for want of jurisdiction.
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
Applicant admitted to using AI in written submissions.
The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Confirm that each authority supports the stated proposition and has not been mischaracterized.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.