Law Society of New Brunswick Discipline Committee
Law Society of New Brunswick Discipline Committee appears in 1 of 2,236 public corpus records (0.04%). This page describes the recorded dataset, not an incidence rate, prevalence of AI use, or a prediction of future outcomes.
See Fictitious citations in Canadian courts for counts by party and outcome and the court guidance on AI.
What kinds of legal AI issues and responses appear in Law Society of New Brunswick Discipline Committee?
AI Vortex currently links 1 source-linked public matter associated with Law Society of New Brunswick Discipline Committee. The most frequently recorded issue signals are Fabricated authorities (1). Recorded responses and outcomes include No adjudicated consequence recorded (1). Categories can overlap within the same matter, and these counts describe this public corpus rather than the overall behavior or sanction rate of the court.
This profile currently contains only 1 source-linked record. Patterns are displayed for transparency but are not a stable basis for comparison.
Every count below links to the exact matching records. The linked source, subsequent docket history, and local procedural context remain controlling.
Denis Sawyer discipline: what the Law Society of New Brunswick decided
A New Brunswick lawyer, Denis Sawyer, was disciplined by a panel of the Law Society of New Brunswick Discipline Committee after a brief he filed in the New Brunswick Provincial Court contained fictitious citations. This section is written from the Law Society's own published notices, which we re-read on October 24, 2026, not from press coverage.
- ChargesTwo: submitting fictitious citations to the Provincial Court (ten of twelve citations in the April 29, 2025 brief were fictitious), and using generative AI in an incompetent manner, without properly reviewing the output.
- Rules citedRules 2.1-1 (Integrity), 3.1-2 (Competence), 3.2-1 (Quality of Service) and 5.1-1 (Advocacy) of the 2023 Code of Professional Conduct, plus Appendix B, Guidelines on Ethics and New Technology.
- His replyHe admitted paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2 of the Notice of Complaint and accepted "full responsibility for my oversight" (reply dated July 17, 2026).
- DecisionOn September 3, 2026 the panel, with his consent, ordered a two-week suspension, a fine of $10,000, costs of $2,000, 4.5 hours of approved AI training and a review of every file before the courts.
Timeline from the Law Society's notices
- April 29, 2025Brief filed with the New Brunswick Provincial Court; ten of its twelve citations were fictitious. After he was told, a second brief kept two of them, and he attributed a quote to one. At the hearing, at opposing counsel's request, he disavowed both briefs (Notice of Complaint, charge 2.1).
- July 22, 2026The Law Society's Registrar of Complaints issued the public Notice of Complaint (Form 22), referring the charges to a Discipline Committee panel.
- August 4, 2026Notice of Hearing (Form 23): hearing set for September 3, 2026, 9:30 a.m., in Fredericton.
- September 3, 2026Panel order, made with his consent: suspension of two weeks under s. 60(1)(c) of the Law Society Act, 1996, served October 10 to 19, 2026 (excluding October 13) and November 9 to 13, 2026; fine of $10,000 and costs of $2,000 payable to the Law Society within 30 days (the notice shows "$" without naming a currency); 4.5 CPD hours on AI in the legal profession, at his expense, within 30 days; and a review of all his files before the courts, with immediate notice to the court and opposing counsel for any case or summary created by generative AI, and a declaration to the Law Society within 30 days.
- September 8, 2026Notice of Suspension published by the Law Society. The panel recorded that he had agreed to plead guilty to charges contrary to the four rules above and Appendix B.
The structured record in this corpus is still the July 22, 2026 Notice of Complaint (outcome "Notice of Complaint filed"), which is why the counts below show no adjudicated consequence. The Law Society's September 8, 2026 Notice of Suspension supersedes it, and the corpus record has not been updated here.
Why this differs from a court sanction
This is professional discipline by the regulator, not a sanction by the judge who received the brief. In Mata v. Avianca the court itself ordered a $5,000 penalty and letters to the people named; in New Brunswick the licensing body suspended the lawyer, fined him and ordered AI training. Both turn on the same duty: check what you file. The Law Society's notice does not say which AI tool was used, and neither do we.
Primary sources (read October 24, 2026)
- Law Society of New Brunswick: discipline history (full list), Denis Sawyer entry
- Form 22, Notice of Complaint (July 22, 2026)
- Reply to the Notice of Complaint (July 17, 2026)
- Form 23, Notice of Hearing (August 4, 2026)
- Notice of Suspension (September 8, 2026)
Questions this page answers
- What discipline did Denis Sawyer receive from the Law Society of New Brunswick?
- On September 3, 2026 a Discipline Committee panel, with his consent, ordered a two-week suspension (October 10 to 19 and November 9 to 13, 2026), a $10,000 fine and $2,000 in costs payable to the Law Society within 30 days (the notice does not name a currency), 4.5 hours of approved AI training, and a review of his court files with a declaration to the Law Society. Source: the Law Society's Notice of Suspension of September 8, 2026.
- What did Denis Sawyer do?
- According to the Notice of Complaint, he signed and filed a brief with the New Brunswick Provincial Court on or around April 29, 2025 in which ten of twelve citations were fictitious, kept two of them in a revised brief, and used generative AI without properly reviewing the output. He admitted both charges in his reply.
- Which professional rules were breached?
- Rules 2.1-1 (Integrity), 3.1-2 (Competence), 3.2-1 (Quality of Service) and 5.1-1 (Advocacy) of the Law Society of New Brunswick Code of Professional Conduct (2023), and Appendix B on ethics and new technology.
- Where are the Law Society's primary documents?
- On the Law Society's discipline history page: the Notice of Complaint, the Reply, the Notice of Hearing and the Notice of Suspension for Denis Sawyer. They are linked under Primary sources on this page.
Related pages
What problems appear in these records?
Issue categories can overlap within a single matter.
How did courts or authorities respond?
Response categories can overlap and do not imply that every matter ended in a sanction.
Who appears in these matters?
Which practice areas are represented?
No classified values are currently recorded for this dimension.
How is AI involvement recorded?
Unspecified attribution is not evidence that a particular vendor was used.
When were these matters recorded?
Public records in this view
Showing the most recent 1 of 1 matching record.
Open all matching recordsScope and limitation
This page groups existing structured public-record fields. For judges, the counts describe matters in which that person is recorded as a decision-maker; they do not establish a judge’s general practices or sanction rate. For every entity type, the view is not a comparison against unobserved proceedings.
Indexing and evidence status
This public entity profile is indexable with transparent source depth. It currently contains fewer than 3 source-linked records and should be read as a narrow corpus view, not a generalized pattern.