Ben-Cohen v. Municipality of Ramat Gan

Ficha del Equipo Editorial a partir de la base mundial AI Hallucination Cases de Damien Charlotin. Verifica siempre en la fuente original.

El 22 de marzo de 2026, Supreme Court (Israel) conoció un asunto en el que un abogado se apoyó en una herramienta de IA generativa (no identificada en la decisión) y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Fabricación de norma legal. Municipality relied on and quoted sections (2.1, 2.3, 4.1) of a non-existent Ministry of Education Director-General Circular 5783/4(a) (1.9.2022); court found the circular and the quoted passages do not exist.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Municipality cited 'Family Appeal (ש"מע) (Center) 31135-07-20' for a supposed determination about 'center of life' and third-party rights; court inspected the judgment and found no such wording or determination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Municipality cited 'ש"מע (Tel Aviv) 13008-02-21' as holding that custody/parental responsibility is irrelevant to eligibility absent an official dual address; court found the judgment contains no discussion of dual address or such holdings.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Municipality quoted a PD citation (PD 47(5) 672, 679 (1993)) and ascribed a quotation about litigation costs to it; court found the cited judgment/quotation does not exist.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Municipality relied on citation 'מ"עע2398/12' (dated and respondent details inconsistent) for a procedural-conduct holding; court found the reference and the stated determination were incorrect/mismatched.

Desenlace

Adverse Costs Order. Sanción económica: 30000 ILS. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de /documents/1788/Ben_Cohen_Israel_22_March_2026.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

¿Conoces un caso que falte, o uno colombiano que debamos cubrir a fondo? Escríbenos.