Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Was A2501881 (Re) on the other side of your case?

Check their next brief before they file — Opposition Check verifies every citation in a filed brief for $49, no signup. Get Opposition Check →

A2501881 (Re)

Court
BC WCAT
Jurisdiction
Canada
Decided
2026-08-06
AI tool
Implied
Outcome
Warning
Monetary penalty
None reported

What was hallucinated

Fabricated: Legal Norm | The worker attributed a quotation about relevant new evidence to item 22.4.3 of WCAT’s MRPP. Because item 22.4.3 does not exist, the attributed authority was fabricated. || False Quotes: Doctrinal Work | The worker attributed a quotation concerning investigators considering the full context and evolution of bullying and harassment to page 44 of Towards a Respectful Workplace. The panel searched the publication, including page 44 and following pages, and could not find the quotation. || False Quotes: Doctrinal Work | The worker attributed a second quotation concerning bullying and harassment as a pattern of behaviour to page 44 of Towards a Respectful Workplace. The panel found that this quotation also did not appear in the publication. || Fabricated: Legal Norm | The worker cited items 22.4.1 and 22.4.3 of WCAT’s Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure, but the MRPP ends at item 21.4. The panel found that the cited provisions do not exist.

Sanction teardown · BC WCAT, Canada · 2026-08-06

A2501881 (Re)

What happened

In BC WCAT, Canada, a filing relied on an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool to help draft legal argument. The court identified the following problems with the citations in that filing:

  • Fabricated (Legal Norm)
    The worker attributed a quotation about relevant new evidence to item 22.4.3 of WCAT’s MRPP. Because item 22.4.3 does not exist, the attributed authority was fabricated.
  • False Quotes (Doctrinal Work)
    The worker attributed a quotation concerning investigators considering the full context and evolution of bullying and harassment to page 44 of Towards a Respectful Workplace. The panel searched the publication, including page 44 and following pages, and could not find the quotation.
  • False Quotes (Doctrinal Work)
    The worker attributed a second quotation concerning bullying and harassment as a pattern of behaviour to page 44 of Towards a Respectful Workplace. The panel found that this quotation also did not appear in the publication.
  • Fabricated (Legal Norm)
    The worker cited items 22.4.1 and 22.4.3 of WCAT’s Manual of Rules of Practice and Procedure, but the MRPP ends at item 21.4. The panel found that the cited provisions do not exist.

Which AI tool

an unnamed/unconfirmed AI tool. Note: Charlotin's public database records tool attribution only where a court order, brief, or reporting on the matter states it explicitly; "unidentified" or "implied" means the record indicates AI use but does not name a specific product — we do not guess.

Outcome

Warning

How Citation Safe would have caught this

Citation Safe runs three deterministic layers before a brief is filed: (1) does the citation exist against CourtListener's database of published opinions, (2) if quoted, does that exact language appear in the source, (3) does the cited case actually support the proposition it is cited for. Fabricated case citations fail Layer 1. Fabricated or misattributed quotations fail Layer 2 even when the underlying case is real. Misrepresented holdings — a real case cited for a proposition it does not support — are the target of Layer 3. None of these checks involve asking another language model whether the citation looks right; they are lookups and text-matches against the actual source, which is why a hallucinated citation has to survive a direct lookup against the authoritative source — not another model's opinion — to earn a VERIFIED stamp; our measured false-verify rate is published live at /quality.

Check a brief before you file it → · See our live false-verify rate

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3215/A2501881_v_Canada_06-08-2026.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/3215/A2501881_v_Canada_06-08-2026.pdf

Don’t be the next case in this database.

Citation Safe checks every citation against primary sources before it reaches a filing.

Try the free checkerBack to database

On the opposing side of their next motion?

Check their next brief through the same engine that would have caught this filing — $49, no signup, full annotated report you can attach to your Rule 11 or sanctions motion.

Open Opposition Check — $49Sanctions-motion template