technology

A British prosecutor cites invented case law three times, probably generated by AI

The High Court ultimately held that this invented case law was not sufficient to call the prosecutions into question.

london, quand, guardian, au royaume, ravinder dhillon, intelligence, artificielle, britanniques

Key facts

  • To support her decision, she cites three times a Court of Appeal ruling that was supposedly delivered in 2024. This case law does not exist.
  • The High Court ultimately found that this invented case law was not enough to challenge the prosecution.
  • The boy's lawyers notice this while examining the note. They request that the charges be dropped.

To support her decision, she cites three times a Court of Appeal ruling that was supposedly delivered in 2024. This case law does not exist.

The High Court ultimately found that this invented case law was not enough to challenge the prosecution.

The boy's lawyers notice this while examining the note. They request that the charges be dropped.

The prosecutor considers the charges too serious to drop.

The British Crown Prosecution Service acknowledges a research error, without saying more.

The error, according to the British newspaper, could therefore come from AI.

A London lawyer, Matthew Lee, now keeps a register of 101 reports of legal errors potentially linked to artificial intelligence, whether proven, suspected or disputed cases.

Lire en français