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
- 2,109
- Courts covered
- 398
- Cases with a reported penalty
- 374
- USD-denominated penalties
- $1,400,706
- across 207 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.
73 cases match these filters · page 2 of 2
| Case | Court | Jurisdiction | Judge | Decided | AI tool | Outcome | Penalty | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ANPV and SAPV v Secretary of State for the Home Department | Upper Tribunal (IAC) | UK | — | 2025-09-29 | Microsoft Copilot | Order to Show Cause | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| ANPV & SAPV v Secretary of State for the Home Department | Upper Tribunal | UK | — | 2025-09-29 | Microsoft Copilot | Show Cause Order | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Franklin Paterson Wandji Mboungueng v Severn Trent Water Limited | Employment Tribunal, Birmingham | UK | — | 2025-09-22 | Implied | The application to set aside the dismissal was refused. No sanction or monetary penalty was imposed for the inaccurate authorities, but the Tribunal warned that further serious inaccuracies could result in strike-out for scandalous or unreasonable conduct. | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Kuzniar v General Dental Council | Employment Tribunal | UK | — | 2025-08-15 | ChatGPT | Tribunal declined to award costs | None reported | Source (naturalandartificiallaw.com) |
| Holloway v Beckles | First-tier Tribunal | UK | — | 2025-08-12 | Unidentified | Costs Order | 750 GBP | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| MS (Bangladesh) | Immigration and Asylum Chamber | UK | — | 2025-08-12 | ChatGPT | Referred to the Bar Standards Board for investigation | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| The Father v The Mother | High Court | UK | — | 2025-07-30 | Implied | Costs awarded against the Father (partly for relying on faked cases). | 5900 GBP | Source (naturalandartificiallaw.com) |
| Chanda v Royal Mail Group Ltd | Employment Tribunal | UK | — | 2025-07-28 | Implied | Refusal of strike-out application with finding of unreasonable conduct | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| HMRC v. Gunnarson | Upper Tribunal (Tax and Chancery Chamber) | UK | — | 2025-07-23 | Unidentified | Warning | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| PS v London Borough of Wandsworth | Upper Tribunal | UK | — | 2025-07-14 | Implied | — | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Various Leaseholders v Assethold Limited | Property Chamber | UK | — | 2025-07-07 | Implied | — | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Pro Health Solutions Ltd v ProHealth Inc | Intellectual Property Office | UK | — | 2025-06-20 | ChatGPT | Warning; No costs awarded for the appeal since both sides seemingly erred | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| UB v Secretary of State for the Home Department | Upper Tribunal (Immigration and Asylum Chamber) | UK | — | 2025-06-18 | Unidentified | — | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Ayinde v. Haringey & Al-Haroun v. QNB | High Court | UK | — | 2025-06-06 | Unidentified | No contempt, but referral to professional bodies | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Bandla v. Solicitors Regulation Authority | UK | UK | — | 2025-05-13 | Google 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 denied | 24727 GBP | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Crypto Open Patent Alliance v. Wright (2) | UK | UK | — | 2025-05-12 | Implied | General Civil Restraint Order (GCRO) granted for 3 years; Case referred to Attorney General; Costs awarded to applicants. | 100000 GBP | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Goshen Multiservice Limited v Accuro Environmental Limited | Employment Tribunals (London, South) | UK | — | 2025-04-22 | Implied | — | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Ayinde v. Borough of Haringey | High Court | UK | — | 2025-04-03 | Unidentified | Wasted costs order; Partial disallowance of Claimant’s costs; Order to send transcript to Bar Standards Board and Solicitors Regulation Authority | 11000 GBP | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Zzaman v. HMRC | First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) | UK | — | 2025-04-03 | Implied | Warning | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Olsen v Finansiel Stabilitet | High Court | UK | — | 2025-01-25 | Implied | No contempt, but might bear out on costs | None reported | Source (judiciary.uk) |
| Crypto Open Patent Alliance v. Wright (1) | High Court | UK | — | 2024-12-06 | Unknown | No formal sanction; fabricated citations disregarded | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Mr D Rollo v. Marstons Trading Ltd | Employment Tribunal | UK | — | 2024-08-01 | ChatGPT | Claim dismissed; AI material excluded from evidence under prior judicial order; no sanction but explicit judicial criticism | None reported | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
| Dr C Mallon v Steer Energy Solutions Limited | Birmingham Employment Tribunal | UK | — | 2024-06-15 | Unidentified | The claimant was ordered to pay £7,500 in costs; the AI-generated submissions were cited as contributing to unreasonable conduct and wasted costs, but no separate penalty was imposed specifically for hallucination. | 1 | Case summary (Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases DB) |
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.