Canary Islands Lawyer Fined for Submitting Fabricated AI-Generated Case Citations
The Criminal Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Canary Islands (TSJC) has imposed a €420 fine on a lawyer for submitting a legal appeal containing 48 fabricated case citations generated by artificial intelligence. The court determined this action constituted a breach of the duty of truthfulness and the rules of good faith, alongside an abuse of the public service of Justice.
AI-Generated Falsehoods in Legal Filing
The lawyer utilized a “generalist” AI tool – not specifically designed for legal applications – while preparing an appeal against a ruling from the Provincial Court of Santa Cruz de Tenerife. The appeal included 48 purported rulings from the Supreme Court and a report from the General Council of the Judiciary, all of which were found to be nonexistent upon verification by the TSJC’s documentalist. La Voz de Lanzarote reported on the details of the case.
Court Emphasizes Human Oversight
The TSJC emphasized that the lawyer failed to conduct any review or verification of the AI-generated citations. The court noted that a simple check against publicly accessible and free legal databases, such as the Judicial Documentation Center (Cendoj), would have revealed the falsity of the references. Nucleo Visual highlighted the court’s concern regarding the lack of “basic duty of human supervision” when employing AI tools in professional practice.
Exemplary Fine and Disciplinary Review
In setting the fine at €420, the court adopted an “exemplary” approach, noting that this amount is approximately half the annual cost of a specialized AI tool for legal professionals. The court suggested that utilizing such a tool “would probably have avoided the regrettable result.” Tenerife Weekly initially reported on the investigation.
The TSJC has as well forwarded the case details to the lawyer’s Bar Association to determine if any disciplinary actions are warranted.
AI in Law: A Cautionary Tale
While acknowledging the potential benefits of AI in the legal field, the TSJC stressed that human supervision must remain paramount. The court cautioned against blind reliance on AI-generated results, emphasizing that these tools should serve as support, not as a substitute for professional judgment.