Sanction teardown · West Siberian District AC, Russian Federation · 2026-05-14

ООО «Точка опоры» v. ООО «ЦСС»

What happened

In West Siberian District AC, Russian Federation, 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 (Case Law)
  Cassation cited a Presidium VAS R.F. ruling that the court found does not exist in public databases.
• Fabricated (Case Law)
  Cassation cited a Supreme Court decision (12.12.2018) that the court could not locate and determined does not exist as cited.
• Fabricated (Case Law)
  Cassation cited a ruling of the Arbitrazh Court of the North-Western District (11.03.2021) which the court did not find in the databases.
• Misrepresented (Case Law)
  Cassation cited a Moscow District decision by number/date that either does not exist as given or corresponds to a different, irrelevant case (misstated reference).
• Fabricated (Case Law)
  Cassation referenced an appellate posting purportedly supporting the position; the database contained only an operative part or an unrelated decision, not the cited appellate ruling.

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

Monetary Fine (monetary penalty: 50000 .)

Additional detail

The cassation complaint cited multiple judicial acts that the court could not locate or that did not contain the quoted passages; the representative admitted the cited practice did not exist. The court found this to be deliberate fabrication/misrepresentation and imposed a judicial fine of 50,000 RUB on ООО «ЦСС».

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/2172/A27-7831-2025_20260514_Opredelenie.pdf, via Damien Charlotin's public AI Hallucination Cases Database (CC0).