Skip to main content
Citation Safe

Was the sanctioned attorney opposing your firm?

Check their next brief before they file — Opposition Check, $49, no signup. Open Opposition Check →

Get these by email — every new sanction, delivered on the daily 12:00 UTC ingest run.

Free. Full landing page at /sanctions-alert.

Free public database

AI Legal Sanction Case Database

The AI Legal Sanction Case Database is the authoritative, continuously-updated, free index of publicly reported cases where a US or foreign court sanctioned, warned, or issued an order to show cause over AI-hallucinated citations in a legal filing. According to Citation Safe’s public sanctions database, courts have addressed AI-citation problems in 1000 reported cases tracked here as of today, spanning 2023–2026. New cases are ingested daily.

Cases tracked
1,902
Courts covered
396
Cases with a reported penalty
349
USD-denominated penalties
$1,290,986
across 191 USD cases — other currencies not converted

This is the structured dataset: every row here is a live, queryable record — sortable and filterable by jurisdiction, AI tool, judge, and year, with results pulled fresh on every request. Download the full dataset as CSV. For curated write-ups of the highest-profile entries — case background, why each sanction happened, what to take from it — see the AI Hallucination Sanctions Tracker, our editorial companion to this database.

60 cases match these filters · page 2 of 2

CaseCourtJurisdictionJudgeDecidedAI toolOutcomePenaltySource
UB v Secretary of State for the Home DepartmentUpper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber)UK2025-06-18UnidentifiedNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Ayinde v. Haringey & Al-Haroun v. QNBHigh CourtUK2025-06-06UnidentifiedNo contempt, but referral to professional bodiesNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Bandla v. Solicitors Regulation AuthorityUKUK2025-05-13Google Search (Allegedly)Application for extension of time refused; appeal struck out as abuse of process; indemnity costs of £24,727.20 ordered; permission to appeal denied24727 GBPCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Crypto Open Patent Alliance v. Wright (2)UKUK2025-05-12ImpliedGeneral Civil Restraint Order (GCRO) granted for 3 years; Case referred to Attorney General; Costs awarded to applicants.100000 GBPCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Goshen Multiservice Limited v Accuro Environmental LimitedEmployment Tribunals (London, South)UK2025-04-22ImpliedNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Ayinde v. Borough of HaringeyHigh CourtUK2025-04-03UnidentifiedWasted costs order; Partial disallowance of Claimant’s costs; Order to send transcript to Bar Standards Board and Solicitors Regulation Authority11000 GBPCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Zzaman v. HMRCFirst-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)UK2025-04-03ImpliedWarningNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Olsen v Finansiel StabilitetHigh CourtUK2025-01-25ImpliedNo contempt, but might bear out on costsNone reportedSource (judiciary.uk)
Crypto Open Patent Alliance v. Wright (1)High CourtUK2024-12-06UnknownNo formal sanction; fabricated citations disregardedNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
Mr D Rollo v. Marstons Trading LtdEmployment TribunalUK2024-08-01ChatGPTClaim dismissed; AI material excluded from evidence under prior judicial order; no sanction but explicit judicial criticismNone reportedCase summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB)
← PreviousPage 2 of 2Next →

This database aggregates publicly reported court sanctions and orders over AI-hallucinated citations. It is informational only, not legal advice, and not a complete record of every such case nationwide — see our free citation checker to verify your own filings before this happens to you.