The information displayed in the AIM should not be reported as representing the official views of the OECD or of its member countries.
A Vancouver lawyer used ChatGPT to generate legal materials containing fictitious case citations, which were submitted in a B.C. Supreme Court case. The incident led to a judicial order for the lawyer to pay costs, a Law Society investigation, and warnings about the risks of uncritical AI use in legal practice.[AI generated]
Why's our monitor labelling this an incident or hazard?
The event explicitly involves the use of an AI system (ChatGPT) to generate fake legal cases that were submitted in court filings. This use led to harm: disruption of legal proceedings, extra work and costs for opposing counsel, and potential risk to the justice system's integrity. Although there was no intent to deceive, the AI-generated false information caused real harm and was a direct factor in the incident. Hence, it meets the criteria for an AI Incident as the AI system's use directly led to harm (disruption and breach of legal process).[AI generated]