Skip to main content
NOPE
Medium reported severity Involving minors

Israel: Supreme Court finds Ramat Gan refused a special-education pupil school transport in a letter resting on uncontrolled AI use and invented rulings

In May 2025 the Ramat Gan municipality in Israel refused a request that a special-education pupil be given school transport from his father's home, citing an Education Ministry director-general circular and quotations from recent rulings. The father's lawyer could not find the circular, and the Education Ministry said it did not know it. After the father petitioned the Tel Aviv District Court, the municipality agreed in July 2025 to restore the transport but again filed invented quotations, and the district court refused costs. On appeal, the Supreme Court (Deputy President Noam Sohlberg, ruling published 22 March 2026) held that the documents left no doubt that the municipality had used artificial intelligence and that its decision, at least as presented to the pupil, clearly rested on uncontrolled AI use. It ordered the municipality to pay 30,000 shekels in costs.

AI system
Unidentified AI tool
Occurred
25 May 2025
Reported
22 March 2026
Event location
Israel
What the AI did
Informed a human decision about the person
Reported harm
Educational HarmLegal HarmPsychological Distress
Whose AI use
An institution’s AI use
Setting
Education · Public services · Justice
Evidence
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources
4 claims: 4 documented. 3 open questions
People reported harmed
2 people

AI system as recorded: Unidentified generative AI system whose uncontrolled use, according to the Israeli Supreme Court, produced the non-existent circular and invented case-law quotations in the Ramat Gan municipality's refusal letter and court filings

What Happened

The decision. The pupil's parents live apart. His transport from his father's home was first approved and then cancelled. In April 2025 the father, through a lawyer, asked again. On 25 May 2025 the municipality refused, citing a director-general circular of the Education Ministry on transport for special-education pupils of separated parents, the parents' separation agreement and quotations from recent rulings; an earlier refusal had cited the separation agreement, under which custody was with the mother. The father's lawyer could not find the circular; the Education Ministry wrote that it did not know the circular the municipality cited, and the procedure it sent did not contain the quoted passages.

The litigation. The father petitioned the Tel Aviv District Court, arguing that the circular did not exist and that the quoted rulings were apparently written by artificial intelligence. On 17 July 2025 the municipality agreed, as an exceptional measure, to restore the transport; in its response to the father's request for costs it cited another invented quotation, and on 3 August 2025 the district court refused costs. On appeal the municipality again filed an invented quotation.

The ruling. The Supreme Court held that the documents left no room for doubt about the municipality's use of AI, both in its initial decision and in the proceedings, and that its decision, at least as presented to the pupil, clearly rested on uncontrolled AI use. It described the use as reckless, stressed that a citizen who receives an apparently reasoned decision usually cannot discover that its reasons are an AI system's invention, and ordered 30,000 shekels in costs against the municipality. The municipality had argued that any errors were technical and that its decision stood regardless of a mistaken quotation. Davar reports the father's lawyer saying the father felt anger, frustration and a sense of injustice at having to go to court.

Reported harm

The pupil was refused school transport from his father's home on the basis of invented authorities, and the family had to petition the courts; the father's lawyer told Davar the father felt anger and frustration. Transport was restored in July 2025.

How Harm Occurred

A municipality refused a special-education pupil's school transport in a letter whose authorities, according to the Supreme Court, came from uncontrolled AI use and did not exist; the family had to litigate to restore the transport.

Outcome

Resolved

The municipality agreed in July 2025, as an exceptional measure, to restore the pupil's transport from the father's home; the district court refused costs in August 2025. On appeal the Supreme Court ordered the municipality to pay 30,000 shekels in costs (ruling reported 22 March 2026) and refrained, this time, from personal costs against the lawyers.

What remains unknown

  • Which AI system the municipality used and who in the municipality used it.
  • How long the pupil was without transport from his father's home between the refusal and July 2025.
  • Any disciplinary outcome inside the municipality.

What the evidence supports

AI involvement: supported. The Supreme Court found that the documents left no doubt that the municipality had used AI in its initial decision and in the proceedings, and that the refusal, at least as presented to the pupil, clearly rested on uncontrolled AI use: the circular it cited was unknown to the Education Ministry and the quoted rulings did not contain the passages. The AI output thus supplied the reasons for the municipality's decision about the pupil. The specific AI system is not named.

4 claims: 4 documented. What the statuses mean

Documented On 25 May 2025 the municipality refused transport for the pupil from his father's home, citing an Education Ministry director-general circular and quotations from recent rulings.

Causal attribution. Facts recited by the Supreme Court from the documents before it.

  • z.calcalist.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'נדחתה בקשתו של האב .במענה מיום 25.5.2025נכתב ,כי בהתאם להוראות "חוזר מנכ"ל'
  • davar1.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'בתגובה, במאי 2025 עובדי העירייה שלחו מכתב רשמי ומפורט שבו דחו את בקשתו.'
Documented The Education Ministry told the father's lawyer that it did not know the circular the municipality cited.

Causal attribution. The ministry's reply as quoted in the judgment.

Documented The Supreme Court found that the documents left no doubt that the municipality had used AI, and that its decision, at least as presented to the pupil, clearly rested on uncontrolled use of artificial intelligence.

Causal attribution. The court's own finding on the AI use; the municipality did not deny it but argued the errors were technical.

  • z.calcalist.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'עיון במסמכים שצורפו לערעור ,לא מותיר מקום לספק באשר לשימוש שעשתה'; 'כפי שהוצגה למערער – התבססה בבירור על שימוש לא מבוקר בבינה מלאכותית'
  • bizportal.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'עיריית רמת גן תשלם הוצאות בסך 30,000 שקל בשל "שימוש מופקר"'
Documented The municipality agreed in July 2025 to restore the transport, and the Supreme Court ordered it to pay 30,000 shekels in costs.

Causal attribution. Outcome as recorded in the judgment and reported.

  • z.calcalist.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'בתשלום הוצאות על סך של – ₪ 30,000'
  • davar1.co.il(opens in new tab) supports · Hebrew
    'ביולי העירייה הסכימה לפנים משורת הדין להחזיר לילד את הזכאות להסעות'; 'בית המשפט העליון חייב את עיריית רמת גן לשלם לאב 30,000 ש"ח הוצאות משפט'

Sources

3 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.

How the sources were read, and where the events happened

Read in Hebrew by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Supreme Court judgment PDF hosted by Calcalist; the live file returned HTTP 403, so a Web Archive capture of the same URL was read in full (text extracted from the PDF). Applies to s1.

Read in Hebrew by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Davar report of 24 March 2026 with comment from the father's lawyer; the live page returned HTTP 403, so a Web Archive capture of the same URL was read in full. Applies to s2.

Read in Hebrew by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-27 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Bizportal (Takdin) report of 22 March 2026 quoting the judgment; HTML read, HTTP 200. Applies to s3.

Event countries: Israel. Affected-person countries: Unknown. Court countries: Israel.

The decision was taken by the Ramat Gan municipality and litigated in the Tel Aviv District Court and the Israeli Supreme Court (judgment and Davar). The family's residence is not used as the event location.

Reviewed for publication 2026-10-27: Published as an AI-informed administrative decision about a person: the Israeli Supreme Court found that Ramat Gan municipality's refusal of a special-education pupil's school transport rested on uncontrolled AI use with an invented circular and rulings, and ordered costs against the municipality.

People described

A special-education pupil in Ramat Gan and his father, who sought school transport from the father's home

People reported harmed in this case

2 people

0 AI participants · 2 other people harmed

The pupil (the appellant) and his father, who brought the request and the litigation; the ruling and Davar describe both. The municipality's staff used the AI system, so neither is counted as a user.

Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.

Tags

#public-services#education#special-education#hallucinated-authorities#supreme-court#israel

Cite this case

Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.

APA

NOPE. (2026). Israel: Supreme Court finds Ramat Gan refused a special-education pupil school transport in a letter resting on uncontrolled AI use and invented rulings. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2025-ramat-gan-supreme-court-finds-city-denied-special-education-pupils-school-transport-with-ai-invented-circular-and-rulings

BibTeX

@misc{2025_ramat_gan_supreme_court_finds_city_denied_special_education_pupils_school_transport_with_ai_invented_circular_and_rulings,
  title = {Israel: Supreme Court finds Ramat Gan refused a special-education pupil school transport in a letter resting on uncontrolled AI use and invented rulings},
  author = {NOPE},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {AI incidents},
  url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2025-ramat-gan-supreme-court-finds-city-denied-special-education-pupils-school-transport-with-ai-invented-circular-and-rulings}
}

Related cases

Medium Gaggle

Lawrence, Kansas: students say Gaggle AI monitoring flagged class photography as child sexual images, leading to questioning and removed work

The Lawrence, Kansas, school district began using Gaggle, a student-monitoring service, on school accounts in November 2023. A federal lawsuit filed on 1 August 2025 by current and former students alleges that Gaggle, which the complaint says operates through artificial intelligence that flags items for review by Gaggle moderators, flagged original photography assignments uploaded by art and photography students. According to the complaint, in early 2024 security officers took students out of class to the front office of a Lawrence high school, where administrators told them their images had been flagged by Gaggle for indecent exposure and child pornography; an assistant principal accused a photography student of having such material, refused to let her view the images, and questioned her about them from memory, and administrators admitted they had not seen the flagged content. The student told them she had uploaded that day a photography assignment showing a fully clothed friend; the complaint says the flagged content consisted of original photographs taken for class assignments, that students found their photographs removed from their school accounts only by comparing them with personal backups, that one student had to explain each image in her portfolio to district staff and became concerned that future assignments would bring more scrutiny, and that the district restored the images only after months of advocacy. The Associated Press, in reporting that included an analysis of the district's Gaggle alert records, said the photos had been automatically deleted and that students with backups showed it was a false alarm, and that district officials said they later adjusted the software's settings to reduce false alerts. On 8 April 2026 the federal court dismissed, on qualified immunity, the claims against the assistant principal and another official, saying it had found no law establishing that a school official cannot rely on an AI surveillance flag to call in a student for questioning; other claims against the district continue, and the docket shows depositions noticed in October 2026.

Medium Unidentified AI tool

Israeli court strikes a defendant's expert report it found rested on AI-hallucinated case law and orders her to pay the banks' costs

On 8 October 2026 the Magistrates' Court in Nof HaGalil-Nazareth, Israel, struck from the file a banking expert's opinion that a defendant in a civil negligence suit had filed, finding that the heart of the opinion and its annexes rested on clear 'AI hallucinations': a Supreme Court ruling the court could not locate, a book it could not find and statutory sections quoted with text the statute does not contain. The court also refused the defendant's request to amend her third-party notice against two banks, partly because the amendment relied on the struck opinion, and ordered her to pay costs of 2,500 shekels to each bank. No AI tool is named, and the decision records no response from the expert.

Medium Unidentified AI tool

India's Supreme Court overturns customs penalty citing apparent AI hallucinations

On 8 October 2025 the Additional Commissioner of Customs in Surat imposed a penalty of ₹425,27,99,100 (about ₹425 crore) on a diamond trader under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, for allegedly misdeclaring a consignment of natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds to pay a lower tariff. The trader's challenge was dismissed by the Gujarat High Court on 20 January 2026. Before the Supreme Court the trader argued that judgments and articles cited in the penalty order had been generated using artificial intelligence. On 2 September 2026 a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu, after checking the material, found that the order relied on case law that was non-existent or carried fake citations, and on real cases that did not lay down the propositions attributed to them, which the court said 'appears to be a hallucination of AI'. Holding that the use of AI and reliance on this dubious material was fatal to the order, the court set aside both the penalty order and the High Court's order without deciding the merits, sent the matter for fresh adjudication by a different officer of the same rank, and left any action against the order's author to the appointing authority. The AI tool used is not named in the read reports.

Low ChatGPT

Dutch court strikes out a couple's marriage record because the ChatGPT-assisted ceremony speech left out the legally required declaration

The Rechtbank Overijssel (Zwolle location) ordered on 5 January 2026 that a couple's marriage record of April 2025 be struck out of the Zwolle register of marriages, holding that no marriage had come into existence. The couple had asked an acquaintance to conduct the ceremony as a one-day special registrar, and because they wanted a light-hearted ceremony the officiant wrote the speech with the help of ChatGPT. The speech, which the court quotes, asked the partners to stand by each other and declared them 'a team', but it did not contain the declaration that Dutch civil law (article 1:67(1) of the Civil Code) requires spouses to make. The public prosecution service says it brought the case after a report from the municipality. The couple said the error was not their responsibility, that the municipal registrar present had not corrected it, and that losing their wedding date had a great emotional impact; the court refused their request to keep the original date.

If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.

Back to all incidents