Geismayr v. The Owners, Strata Plan KAS 1970

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 febrero de 2025, Civil Resolution Tribunal (Canadá) conoció un asunto en el que una parte sin abogado (litigante pro se) se apoyó en la herramienta de IA Copilot y el expediente registró contenido alucinado.

Qué se alucinó

• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Fabricación de jurisprudencia. Applicant cited a nonexistent case (one of nine AI-sourced items without legal citations); tribunal found it does not exist and is likely a Copilot hallucination.
• Tergiversación de jurisprudencia. Applicants misrepresented Jordison (2013) as supporting that strata cannot force removal of unauthorized alterations; tribunal noted the three 2013 Jordison decisions exist but none concern unauthorized alterations.

Desenlace

Citations ignored. Sanción profesional: No.

Ficha del caso

Fuentes: aporte de /documents/471/Geismayr_v_The_Owners_Strata_Plan_KAS_1970_CRT_Canada_14_February_2025.pdf; base de datos de Damien Charlotin.

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