Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Was B… S… 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 →

B… S… v. Ministre responsable de la Solidarité sociale et de l'Action communautaire

Court
TAQ Québec
Jurisdiction
Canada
Decided
2025-11-12
AI tool
Unidentified
Outcome
—
Monetary penalty
None reported

What was hallucinated

False Quotes: Legal Norm | AI-generated notice presented text purporting to be article 55 of the LAPF and article 69 of its regulation that did not match the official statutory text; Tribunal found the presented text false. || Outdated Advice: Repealed Law | AI-generated filing attacked the constitutionality of article 42 of the LAPF, which had been abrogated in 2013; Tribunal noted the provision was no longer in force. || Misrepresented: Legal Norm | AI-generated notice enumerated numerous statutes and regulatory provisions (e.g., art. 17 of the Règlement sur l'aide aux personnes et aux familles; provisions of Loi sur le ministère de l'Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale) that do not apply to the contested decisions and lacked any explanation of how they infringe rights. || Misrepresented: Other | AI-generated materials contained numerous incoherences, contradictions and 'false information' across legislative and jurisprudential excerpts, undermining clarity and accuracy of the constitutional notice.

Sanction teardown · TAQ Québec, Canada · 2025-11-12

B… S… v. Ministre responsable de la Solidarité sociale et de l'Action communautaire

What happened

In TAQ Québec, 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:

  • False Quotes (Legal Norm)
    AI-generated notice presented text purporting to be article 55 of the LAPF and article 69 of its regulation that did not match the official statutory text; Tribunal found the presented text false.
  • Outdated Advice (Repealed Law)
    AI-generated filing attacked the constitutionality of article 42 of the LAPF, which had been abrogated in 2013; Tribunal noted the provision was no longer in force.
  • Misrepresented (Legal Norm)
    AI-generated notice enumerated numerous statutes and regulatory provisions (e.g., art. 17 of the Règlement sur l'aide aux personnes et aux familles; provisions of Loi sur le ministère de l'Emploi et de la Solidarité sociale) that do not apply to the contested decisions and lacked any explanation of how they infringe rights.
  • Misrepresented (Other)
    AI-generated materials contained numerous incoherences, contradictions and 'false information' across legislative and jurisprudential excerpts, undermining clarity and accuracy of the constitutional notice.

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

Not specified in source record.

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/1904/BS-v.-Minister-responsible-for-Social-Solidarity.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).

Source: https://www.damiencharlotin.com/documents/1904/BS-v.-Minister-responsible-for-Social-Solidarity.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