{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-10-23T09:23:27.344Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"fine","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"","evidence":"","year":"unknown","response":"regulatory","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":2,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":0,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":2,"lawsuits":0,"regulatory":2,"minors":0,"coreRelations":2,"contextualRelations":1,"mixedRelations":1,"unknownRelations":0,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":0},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2026-udmurtia-entrepreneur-fined-by-russian-intellectual-property-court-over-ai-invented-case-law","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Суд установил, что часть из приведенных предпринимателем в тексте кассационной жалобы 12 ссылок на судебную практику, в том числе одна якобы на правовую позицию, изложенную в определении Верховного суда РФ, относилась к несуществующим судебным актам либо содержала приписанные им выводы; наложил на предпринимателя судебный штраф в размере 5 тысяч рублей","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"Суд по интеллектуальным правам оштрафовал на пять тысяч рублей индивидуального предпринимателя из Удмуртии, который сослался в своей жалобе на несуществующую практику.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The Court for Intellectual Property Rights found that part of the 12 case-law references in the entrepreneur's cassation appeal, including one said to be a position of the Supreme Court of Russia, referred to non-existent court acts or attributed conclusions to them, and imposed a court fine of 5,000 roubles.","causal_attribution":"The court's findings as relayed by its press service and by Rossiyskaya Gazeta; the ruling itself was not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Бизнесмен пояснил, что при подготовке кассационной жалобы использовал сервис, работающий на основе искусственного интеллекта.; Именно нейросеть подобрала судебную практику","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"несуществующую судебную практику, сгенерированную сервисами искусственного интеллекта","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The entrepreneur explained that he had prepared the cassation appeal with an AI-based service, which selected the case law he cited.","causal_attribution":"His own explanation to the court, reported by Rossiyskaya Gazeta; the press service describes the case law as generated by AI services."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"Защита предпринимателя заявила, что у него нет юридического образования, поэтому он не мог самостоятельно оценить корректность ссылок.; Оправдаться не получилось.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"представитель заявителя жалобы уверял, что допущенные им неточности и технические ошибки вследствие использования сервисов искусственного интеллекта не свидетельствуют о неуважении к суду; СИП критически оценил аргументы заявителя","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"His side argued that he had no legal education and could not check the references, and that the inaccuracies were technical errors caused by using AI services rather than contempt of court; the court rejected these arguments.","causal_attribution":"The appellant's defence and the court's rejection, as reported."}],"effects":[{"label":"fined 5,000 roubles for contempt of court over AI-invented case law in his appeal","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://1prime.ru/20260827/biznesmen-872750520.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ru","translation_note":"Read in Russian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-23 (HTTP 200) and translated by that agent; no human translator or reviewer read it. PRIME (RIA Novosti group) report of 27 Aug 2026 quoting the court's press service (bodies/ru-prime-sip.html/.txt).","independence_group":"sip-press-service-ria"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://rg.ru/2026/09/01/nejroset-podvela.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"ru","translation_note":"Read in Russian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-23 (HTTP 200) and translated by that agent; no human translator or reviewer read it. Rossiyskaya Gazeta report of 1 Sep 2026 that quotes the court's ruling and describes the parties' explanations (bodies/ru-rg-neiroset.html/.txt).","independence_group":"rg-sip-ruling"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["The date of the ruling; it was reported on 27 August 2026.","Which AI service was used and what it produced beyond the citations described.","Whether the fine was appealed."],"geography":{"basis":"The recorded events are court events in Russia: the appeal was filed with, and the fine imposed by, Russia's Court for Intellectual Property Rights (PRIME; Rossiyskaya Gazeta). Both reports describe the entrepreneur as being from Udmurtia, a Russian region.","court_countries":["RU"],"event_countries":["RU"],"affected_person_countries":["RU"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a core case (communicated_with, with informed_decision_about): by his own account an AI-based service selected case law for an entrepreneur's cassation appeal, part of it did not exist, and the court fined him 5,000 roubles, as reported from the court's press service and the ruling.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-23"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"By the entrepreneur's own explanation to the court, an AI-based service selected the case law in his cassation appeal, and PRIME (RIA Novosti), reporting the court's press service, describes that case law as generated by AI services; the court's own findings as quoted do not mention AI. The court found that part of the references pointed to court acts that do not exist or misstated them, and fined him for it. The AI service is not named, and its output was read only as described in the reports.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with","informed_decision_about"]},"name":"Russian intellectual property court fined an Udmurtia entrepreneur 5,000 roubles over non-existent case law he said an AI service selected, reports say","summary":"Russia's Court for Intellectual Property Rights fined an individual entrepreneur from Udmurtia 5,000 roubles for contempt of court after finding that part of the 12 references to case law in his cassation appeal, including one said to be a Supreme Court position, pointed to court acts that do not exist or attributed conclusions to them, the court's press service told RIA Novosti on 27 August 2026. Rossiyskaya Gazeta reports that the entrepreneur explained he had prepared the appeal with an AI-based service that selected the case law, and that his side argued he had no legal education and could not check the references; the court rejected the argument that the errors were technical. The date of the ruling and the AI service are not reported.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-08-27","aiSystem":"An AI-based service, not named in the reports, that the entrepreneur said selected the case law for his cassation appeal","aiProduct":"Unidentified legal research tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"An entrepreneur was fined 5,000 roubles for contempt of court after his cassation appeal cited non-existent case law that, by his account, an AI-based service had selected.","frameworkFacets":[],"pathwayDirection":"inward","causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":0,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One person: the entrepreneur who used the AI service and was fined (court press service; Rossiyskaya Gazeta).","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"RU","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://1prime.ru/20260827/biznesmen-872750520.html","primarySourceLabel":"PRIME (RIA Novosti), 27 Aug 2026: court fines businessman over fake case law generated by AI","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-23T03:20:50.098873+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-23T03:20:50.098873+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["hallucinated-citations","court-filing","court-fine","russia","own-use","russian-language"]},{"id":"2026-tallinn-administrative-court-fines-complainants-ai-drafted-document-invented-scientists","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Kaebajad pöördusid halduskohtusse raieloa vaidlustamiseks ja saatsid kohtule dokumendi, kus viidati lageraie mõjusid puudutavatele teadustöödele'; 'Kohus avastas, et viidetes nimetatud Eesti teadlasi ei ole päriselt olemas ja kirjeldatud teadustöid polnud võimalik leida'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Kohus avastas, et viidetes nimetatud Eesti teadlasi ei ole päriselt olemas ja kirjeldatud teadustöid polnud võimalik leida'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Complainants contesting a felling permit sent the Tallinn Administrative Court a document citing scientific work on the effects of clear-cutting; the court found that the Estonian scientists named in the references do not exist and that the studies described could not be found.","causal_attribution":"The court's finding as reported by two outlets carrying the same account (one chain); the ruling was not read."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Tallinna Halduskohus määras trahvi kaebajatele, kes esitasid kohtule tehisaru abil koostatud dokumendi, mis sisaldas viiteid välja mõeldud teadlaste töödele'; 'Kaebajad vastasid, et tehisaru kasutamine pole keelatud ja nad ei tahtnud kohut eksitada'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Tallinna halduskohus määras esimest korda kohtusse pöördujatele trahvi, sest kaebuses leidus tehisaru loodud valeväiteid'; 'Kohus nõudis kaebajatelt selgitust, kuidas see dokument on sündinud'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The reports describe the document as drafted with the help of AI (Delfi Ärileht) and the complaint as containing false statements created by AI (ERR); asked by the court how the document had been produced, the complainants replied that using AI is not forbidden and that they had not meant to mislead the court. Neither report says which complainant operated the tool or names it.","causal_attribution":"The outlets' description of the document and the complainants' reported reply (one chain). The reply defends AI use on the complainants' side without identifying who used the tool."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Seejärel määras halduskohus ühele kaebuse esitajale trahvi 150 eurot ja veel üheksale kaebajale 50 eurot'; 'Kohus nentis, et kaebajatel pole küll keelatud tehisaru kasutada, aga on üldteada, et tehisaru võib väljastada eksitavat või isegi valeinfot'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Seejärel määras halduskohus ühele kaebuse esitajale trahvi 150 ja veel üheksale kaebajale 50 eurot'; 'kaebajad vastutavad kohtule esitatud väidete õigsuse eest'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine other complainants 50 euros each, stating that complainants are not forbidden to use AI, that AI is generally known to produce misleading or false information, and that complainants are responsible for the accuracy of what they submit.","causal_attribution":"Court step as reported (one chain); the ruling was not read."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Samuti andis kohus kaebajatele võimaluse esitada viidatud teadustööd kirjalike tõenditena ja hoiatas, et võib neid muidu kohtu eksitamise katse eest trahvida'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Samuti andis kohus kaebajatele võimaluse esitada viidatud teadustööd kirjalike tõenditena ja hoiatas, et võib neid muidu kohtu eksitamise katse eest trahvida'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Before fining them, the court gave the complainants the chance to submit the cited works as written evidence and warned that it could otherwise fine them for attempting to mislead the court.","causal_attribution":"Court step as reported (one chain)."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Trahvimise peale esitatud määruskaebust arutanud Tallinna Ringkonnakohus nõustus halduskohtuga'; 'Riigikohus ei võtnud sel nädalal asja menetlusse, mistõttu on trahv nüüd jõustunud'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The Tallinn Circuit Court, hearing the appeal against the fine, agreed with the administrative court, and Delfi Ärileht reports that the Supreme Court declined to take the case in the week of its 26 June 2026 report, so the fines are in force.","causal_attribution":"Appeal steps as reported by Delfi Ärileht only; the appeal rulings were not read and ERR does not report the appeals."},{"id":"c6","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Ülalmainitud kaasuses määrati trahv halduskohtumenetluse seadustiku kohaselt, kus seisab, et menetlusosalist, kes esitab kohtule teadlikult või raskest hooletusest faktiväite, mis ei ole tõene, võib kohus teda trahvida eelneva hoiatuseta'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'Seadus võimaldab kohtul määrata menetlusosalisele kuni 3200 eurot trahvi, kuid arvestada tuleb ka tema varalist seisundit, rikkumise olemust ja muid asjaolusid'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"ERR reports that the fine was imposed under the Code of Administrative Court Procedure, which allows the court to fine without prior warning a participant who knowingly or through gross negligence submits an untrue factual assertion; Delfi Ärileht reports that the law allows a fine of up to 3200 euros subject to the person's financial situation and the nature of the breach.","causal_attribution":"Legal basis as described by the outlets; the statute and the ruling were not read."}],"effects":[{"label":"a court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine others 50 euros each over a document, reported as drafted with AI, that cited scientists who do not exist","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the complainants' submission cited scientists who do not exist and studies that could not be found, and the court warned them of a fine for attempting to mislead it","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://arileht.delfi.ee/artikkel/120593306/valjamoedud-teadlased-ja-uuringud-kohus-maaras-tehisaru-luulude-eest-eesti-esimese-ai-trahvi","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"et","translation_note":"Read in Estonian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-08 (live, HTTP 200; Delfi Ärileht, published 26 June 2026 at 10:39); no human translator reviewed it and the translation of the cited passages is the research agent's own. Its four case paragraphs match the ERR report sentence for sentence, which indicates one court-information chain; same independence group as ERR. The court rulings were not read. 'tehisaru' is rendered as AI, 'kaebajad' as complainants, 'raieluba' as felling permit and 'määruskaebus' as an appeal against the ruling.","independence_group":"tallinn-administrative-court-ai-fine-announcement-2026-06"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.err.ee/1610063551/kohus-maaras-tehisaru-loodud-valevaidete-tottu-kaebajatele-trahvid","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"et","translation_note":"Read in Estonian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-08 (live, HTTP 200; ERR, published 26 June 2026); no human translator reviewed it and the translation of the cited passages is the research agent's own. Its four case paragraphs match the Delfi Ärileht report sentence for sentence; same independence group. It adds an interview with the chair of the administrative court and a paragraph on the legal basis of the fine. The court rulings were not read.","independence_group":"tallinn-administrative-court-ai-fine-announcement-2026-06"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["own_use"],"contexts":["justice"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool was used, which of the ten complainants operated it, and whether anyone drafted the document on their behalf.","The dates on which the document was submitted, the fines were imposed and the circuit court ruled; only the report date (26 June 2026) and the Supreme Court's refusal in that week are reported.","The outcome of the felling-permit dispute itself.","The case numbers and full reasoning of the three courts; no ruling was read.","Whether the complainants were represented by counsel."],"geography":{"basis":"The events recorded are court events in Estonia: both reports say the complainants sent the document to the Tallinn Administrative Court, which fined them, and Delfi Ärileht says the Tallinn Circuit Court and the Supreme Court dealt with the appeals and calls it Estonia's first AI fine. The reports do not state where the complainants live or where the tool was used, so affected-person countries are left empty.","court_countries":["EE"],"event_countries":["EE"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Full review of a published case: complainants who submitted to the Tallinn Administrative Court a document reported as drafted with AI, citing scientists who do not exist, were fined 150 and 50 euros, and Delfi Ärileht reports the fines in force after the appeals. The account is one court-information chain carried by Delfi Ärileht and ERR, read in Estonian by the research agent; every claim is reported because no ruling was read. The complainants reportedly denied intent to mislead and the court did not forbid AI use; both are preserved. No complainant is named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-08"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Delfi Ärileht reports that the complainants submitted a document drafted with the help of AI, and ERR that the complaint contained false statements created by AI; both report that the complainants, asked how the document was produced, replied that using AI is not forbidden and that they had not meant to mislead the court (c2). The AI output is the document's references to Estonian scientists who do not exist and studies that could not be found (c1), and the court fined the complainants for submitting it (c3). The relation communicated_with records that the tool's output was delivered to the complainants' side, who submitted it and defended their use of AI; the reports do not say which of the ten complainants operated the tool, whether anyone drafted it for them, or what tool was used, so the relation is established for the complainant group and not for each person, and no complainant is counted as a direct user. The harm is the court's sanction for the submission, reviewed as a consequential response; no court ruling was read.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["communicated_with"]},"name":"Estonia: Tallinn Administrative Court reported to have fined ten complainants over an AI-drafted filing that cites scientists who do not exist","summary":"According to Delfi Ärileht and ERR (both 26 June 2026), complainants who went to the Tallinn Administrative Court to contest a felling permit sent the court a document that cited scientific work on the effects of clear-cutting. The court found that the Estonian scientists named in the references do not exist and that the studies could not be found. It asked how the document had been produced, gave the complainants the chance to submit the cited works, and warned of a fine for attempting to mislead the court. The complainants replied that using AI is not forbidden and that they had not meant to mislead the court. The court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine others 50 euros each, saying complainants are responsible for the accuracy of what they submit. Delfi Ärileht reports that the Tallinn Circuit Court agreed and that the Supreme Court declined the case that week, so the fines are in force. No report names the tool or says which complainant used it.","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"unknown","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-06-26","aiSystem":"Unidentified AI tool with which, according to the reports of the court's ruling, the complainants' document was drafted; the document cited scientists who do not exist","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI writing tool","severity":"low","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm","financial_loss"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A court fined one complainant 150 euros and nine others 50 euros each, ten people in all, for submitting a document, reported as drafted with AI, that cited scientists who do not exist; Delfi Ärileht reports that the Circuit Court agreed and that the fines are in force (Delfi Ärileht; ERR for the fines).","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":10,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"Ten people fined: one complainant 150 euros and nine other complainants 50 euros each (Delfi Ärileht; ERR). The reports treat the complainants together as the submitters of the AI-drafted document and do not say which of them operated the tool, so none is counted as a direct user; all ten are counted under other people harmed rather than inventing a split. The total is exact as reported; the allocation between direct users and others is unknown.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","jurisdiction":"EE","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://arileht.delfi.ee/artikkel/120593306/valjamoedud-teadlased-ja-uuringud-kohus-maaras-tehisaru-luulude-eest-eesti-esimese-ai-trahvi","primarySourceLabel":"Delfi Ärileht, 26 June 2026: Invented scientists and studies, court imposes Estonia's first AI fine","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-05T03:33:19.084955+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-08T03:13:55.986988+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["hallucinated-citations","court-filing","court-fine","estonia","tallinn","administrative-court","own-use","estonian-language"]}]}