Director of Public Prosecutions v GR

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

El 14 de agosto de 2025, Supreme Court of Victoria (Australia) conoció un asunto en el que un abogado se apoyó en una IA generativa no identificada y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Initial joint submissions cited non-existent Supreme Court of Victoria cases; court could not locate them and senior counsel admitted "They do not exist."
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Initial submissions included purported direct quotes from cases said to be decisions of this Court, which could not be verified and were withdrawn.
• Citas falsas de doctrina. Initial submissions contained fictitious quotes attributed to the Second Reading Speech for the 1997 Bill; these were removed in the revisions.
• Citas falsas de doctrina. Initial submissions contained fictitious quotes attributed to the VLRC 2014 Final Report; these were removed in the revisions.
• Fabricación de norma legal. Revised submissions referred to legislation that does not exist.
• Fabricación de norma legal. Revised submissions asserted a provision of the Act had been inserted and repealed, but the provision never existed.
• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. Initial submissions also relied on incorrectly cited and inapplicable cases.

Desenlace

N/A. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de /documents/664/Director_of_Public_Prosecutions_v_GR_2025_VSC_490_14_August_2025.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

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