{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-09-30T06:25:50.372Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"penalty","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"unknown","evidence":"","year":"","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":4,"coverage":{"cases":4,"countries":3,"languages":3,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":1,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":1,"regulatory":0,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":0,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":4,"relationPending":1,"relationUnknown":3},"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":"2025-al-haroun-solicitor-referral-ai-citations","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Paragraphs 73–81, especially 76–77 and 81.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The judgment records the solicitor’s withdrawal from litigated matters following reliance on the client’s AI-generated citations and orders a regulatory referral.","causal_attribution":"The judgment connects the professional consequences to failure to verify the client’s research; it does not assign sole causation to AI."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Paragraph 81.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The court declined to initiate contempt proceedings against the solicitor after accepting he had not realised the citations were false.","causal_attribution":"Procedural outcome directly recorded in the judgment."}],"effects":[{"label":"Professional withdrawal and regulatory referral","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Ayinde-v-London-Borough-of-Haringey-and-Al-Haroun-v-Qatar-National-Bank.pdf","kind":"court_judgment","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"","independence_group":"ewhc1383-alharoun"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["others_use"],"contexts":["justice","work"],"unknowns":["Specific AI tools, place of AI use, exact drafting day and month, and subsequent regulatory outcome are unknown.","The relation between the AI tools and the affected solicitor is unknown; the client supplied the research."],"geography":{"basis":"The inspected judgment is from the High Court of England and Wales. Research location and the affected solicitor’s residence are not established.","court_countries":["GB"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Official judgment inspected, with the client’s admitted AI use and the court’s procedural findings distinguished from unestablished downstream outcomes.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"Official judgment inspected, with the client’s admitted AI use and the court’s procedural findings distinguished from unestablished downstream outcomes.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Solicitor referred to regulator after relying on a client’s AI-generated legal citations","summary":"A June 2025 High Court judgment records that a claimant accepted using AI tools in legal research containing fictitious authorities. His solicitor admitted relying on that research without checking it and said he withdrew from litigated matters. The court referred the solicitor to the regulator, while declining contempt proceedings because it accepted he had not realised the citations were false. The judgment does not establish a later disciplinary penalty.","incidentDate":"2025-01-01","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"year","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2025-06-06","aiSystem":"Unspecified publicly available AI legal-research tools","aiProduct":"Unidentified legal research tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"The judgment records the solicitor’s withdrawal from litigated matters following reliance on the client’s AI-generated citations and orders a regulatory referral.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"One solicitor whose professional consequence is recorded. The client and all other litigants are not counted without separate harm evidence.","victimAgeRange":"unknown","platformType":"assistant","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2025/06/Ayinde-v-London-Borough-of-Haringey-and-Al-Haroun-v-Qatar-National-Bank.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey and Al-Haroun v Qatar National Bank [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin)","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T10:28:54.240186+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:16:55.282414+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["historical-2025"]},{"id":"2026-surat-customs-penalty-ai-hallucinated-citations-supreme-court","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The present appeal arose out of an Order-in-Original dated 8 October 2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Surat, imposing a penalty of ₹425,27,99,100 on the appellant under Section 114, Customs Act, 1962, for misdeclaring a consignment of natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds to pay a lower tariff. The challenge to the said penalty before the Gujarat High Court failed, as the appeal was dismissed vide order dated 20 January 2026.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'The penalty was imposed for allegedly misdeclaring a consignment of natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds to attract a lower tariff.'; 'the High Court dismissed his challenge on January 20, 2026, prompting him to approach the Supreme Court.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"On 8 October 2025 the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Surat, imposed a penalty of ₹425,27,99,100 on a diamond trader under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, for allegedly misdeclaring natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds, and the Gujarat High Court dismissed his challenge on 20 January 2026.","causal_attribution":"Facts of the proceedings as recited in the Supreme Court judgment, reported by legal outlets; the judgment itself was not read."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Upon verifying such judgments and articles, it does appear that the second respondent has relied upon case laws that are either non-existent or have fake citations. A further investigation has also revealed that some of the case laws relied upon by the second respondent, which do exist, do not lay down the ratio deduced therefrom and it appears to be a hallucination of AI,' the Court observed.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Upon verification, the court found that the second respondent had \"relied upon case laws that are either non-existent or have fake citations.\" It further found that some case laws which did exist did not lay down the legal propositions attributed to them, and that this \"appears to be a hallucination of AI\".'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The Supreme Court found that the penalty order relied on case law that was non-existent or carried fake citations, and on existing cases that did not lay down the ratio attributed to them, which it said appears to be a hallucination of AI.","causal_attribution":"Finding of the Supreme Court after its own verification of the cited material, as quoted by the reports. The court attributes the defects to AI in qualified terms ('appears to be'); the tool is not named."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'The use of AI in this case, resulting in reliance placed by the second respondent on material which is dubious, proves fatal to the sustainability of the order imposing penalty on the appellant. Such circumstances compel us to interfere and remand the case,' the Court said.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'The proceedings were revived for fresh adjudication by an officer of the same rank other than the officer who had passed the original order.'; 'The Court left it to the wisdom of the appointing authority to initiate such action against the author of the Order-in-Original dated 8 October 2025 as may be warranted in the circumstances, in accordance with law.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'The Supreme Court on Wednesday, September 2, 2026, set aside a customs penalty of over ₹425 crore'; 'A bench of Justice Dipankar Dutta and Justice Sheel Nagu did not examine the merits of the customs case at all.'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"'Верховний суд Індії 2 вересня 2026 року розглянув справу щодо використання штучного інтелекту працівником митниці, який послався на неіснуючі судові справи та фальшиві цитати, накладаючи штраф у розмірі близько $45 млн' (the Supreme Court of India on 2 September 2026 considered a case of a customs officer's use of AI, who cited non-existent cases and fake quotations while imposing a fine of about $45 million)","relation":"context","source_id":"s4"}],"assertion":"On 2 September 2026 the Supreme Court held that the use of AI and the resulting reliance on dubious material was fatal to the penalty order, set aside the order and the High Court's order without deciding the merits, revived the proceedings for fresh adjudication by a different officer of the same rank, and left action against the order's author to the appointing authority.","causal_attribution":"Holding of the Supreme Court as reported."}],"effects":[{"label":"a ₹425 crore customs penalty order resting on non-existent and misattributed case law that the Supreme Court found appeared to be AI hallucination stood against the trader for about eleven months and was upheld by the Gujarat High Court","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"},{"label":"the trader had to take the case to the Supreme Court, which voided the order but revived the proceedings for fresh adjudication","claim_id":"c3","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-scraps-425-crore-penalty-over-fake-citations-ai-hallucinations-in-customs-order","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Full body (including JSON-LD article body) read by curl on 2026-09-29. Reports and quotes the Supreme Court judgment of 2 September 2026.","independence_group":"sc-judgment-gadiya"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2026/09/03/supreme-court-sets-aside-%E2%82%B9425-crore-customs-penalty-over-ai-generated-fake-citations/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"SCC Times case note, read by curl on 2026-09-29; summarises the same judgment (2026 SCC OnLine SC 1741).","independence_group":"sc-judgment-gadiya"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://upstox.com/news/personal-finance/tax/how-a-diamond-trader-got-relief-from-a-425-crore-penalty-after-customs-used-ai-generated-citations/article-199828/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Upstox (4 September 2026), read by curl on 2026-09-29; based on the same judgment.","independence_group":"sc-judgment-gadiya"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://sud.ua/uk/news/abroad/371427-mytnyk-poviryv-shi-i-vypysav-shtraf-na-45-mln-verkhovnyi-sud-use-skasuvav","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"uk","translation_note":"Ukrainian-language report (6 September 2026) read through the r.jina.ai relay on 2026-09-29 (direct fetch 403); translated by the reviewer. Cited only for context; it converts the penalty to about US$45 million.","independence_group":"sc-judgment-gadiya"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["justice","public_services","finance"],"unknowns":["Which AI tool the customs officer used and how it was used in drafting the order.","Whether the trader paid any part of the penalty or incurred other financial consequences while the order stood, and the trader's litigation costs.","The outcome of the revived adjudication and whether any action was taken against the officer.","The trader's country and place of residence."],"geography":{"basis":"The order was passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Surat, challenged in the Gujarat High Court and decided by the Supreme Court of India. The trader's country of residence is not stated in the read reports, so affected_person_countries is left empty.","court_countries":["IN"],"event_countries":["IN"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a concrete case of institutional AI use in an adverse administrative decision about a person: a penalty order that India's Supreme Court voided after finding apparently AI-hallucinated authorities in it. The account rests on legal reporting of the judgment; the judgment text was not read. The underlying misdeclaration allegation was not decided and the proceedings were revived. The trader is not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-29"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The Supreme Court, after individually verifying the cited material, found non-existent cases, fake citations and misattributed ratios in the penalty order and said this 'appears to be a hallucination of AI'; it held that 'the use of AI in this case' was fatal to the order. The tool, and how the officer used it, are not stated in the read reports. The penalty decision was the officer's; whether the AI drafted or merely supplied authorities is unknown, so the AI-to-person relation is recorded as unknown.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Surat, India: a customs officer's ₹425 crore penalty order against a diamond trader relied on non-existent and misattributed case law that India's Supreme Court found 'appears to be a hallucination of AI'; the court set the order aside after the trader had lost in the Gujarat High Court","summary":"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.","incidentDate":"2025-10-08","incidentEndDate":"2026-09-02","incidentKind":"bounded_series","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-09-02","aiSystem":"Unnamed generative AI tool whose output the Supreme Court of India found in a customs penalty order (non-existent and misattributed case law); the tool is not identified in the read reports","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI tool","aiCompany":"Unknown","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["legal_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A diamond trader was subjected for about eleven months to a ₹425 crore customs penalty order, and lost a High Court challenge to it, before India's Supreme Court voided the order because it relied on non-existent and misattributed case law that the court found appeared to be AI hallucination (Supreme Court judgment as reported by Bar & Bench, SCC Online and Upstox). The underlying proceedings were revived.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"One trader, the appellant, on whom the penalty was imposed. The trader did not use the AI; the customs officer did. No other person is reported harmed.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"IN","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"internal_action","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-scraps-425-crore-penalty-over-fake-citations-ai-hallucinations-in-customs-order","primarySourceLabel":"Bar & Bench, 2 September 2026: Supreme Court scraps ₹425 crore penalty over fake citations, AI hallucinations in customs order","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-29T09:08:50.773251+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:55.666396+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["india","surat","customs","supreme-court","hallucinated-citations","institutional-use","administrative-decision","penalty"]},{"id":"2026-gisi-infopro-digital-creteil-ai-dismissals-suspended","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Page 12: 'ORDONNONS la suspension du projet de réorganisation de la Société GISI et du projet de licenciement collectif (des 8 secrétaires de rédaction) en découlant, incluant la suspension des processus de reclassement, jusqu'à ce qu'il soit procédé à la réalisation des tests en situation réelle et à l'élaboration de numéros 0'; 'PRONONÇONS à l'encontre de la société GISI une astreinte provisoire de 8 000 euros par jour de retard pendant une durée de trois mois'; 'FAIT AU PALAIS DE JUSTICE DE CRETEIL, le 15 septembre 2026'. Page 1: 'ORDONNANCE DU : 15 Septembre 2026', 'N° RG 26/00991'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"\"la suspension du projet de réorganisation (...) et du projet de licenciement collectif (des 8 secrétaires de rédaction)\"; \"par jour de retard sur trois mois\"; \"En revanche, les dommages et intérêts réclamés ont été rejetés.\"","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"\"La justice a suspendu mardi en référé un projet de suppression de 8 postes au sein du groupe de presse Gisi (L'Usine nouvelle, LSA, L'Argus de l'assurance...), en lien avec le déploiement de l'intelligence artificielle\"; \"Il a par conséquent suspendu le plan jusqu'à la réalisation de tests complets. Contactée par l'AFP, la direction de Gisi a indiqué se réserver la possibilité de faire appel\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"On 15 September 2026 the Créteil judicial court, sitting in référé on the application of Gisi's CSE, ordered the suspension of Gisi's reorganisation project and of the resulting collective dismissal of the eight secrétaires de rédaction, including the redeployment processes, until real-situation tests and pilot issues confirm what share of sub-editor tasks the generative-AI tool can take over; it imposed a provisional penalty of 8,000 euros per day of delay for three months, refused the damages provision and awarded 2,000 euros in costs.","causal_attribution":"Established by the court order itself and confirmed by L'Informé and AFP, which each consulted the decision."},{"id":"c2","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Page 11: 'représenter un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés de la société GISI'; 'la société GISI ne justifie pas de la mise en oeuvre des dispositifs de prévention du risque lié à l'introduction de la nouvelle technologie d'IA générative alors que dans le DUERP 2025 qu'elle produit (pièce 5) elle identifie 3 risques en lien avec l'introduction de l'IA (stress lié à l'insécurité de l'emploi lié à l'intelligence artificielle ; changements organisationnels liés à l'introduction de l'intelligence artificielle ; absence de repères liés à l'utilisation de l'IA et manque d'acculturation) mais ne les a pas côtés'. Page 10: 'sans aucune participation des salariés concernés, ni réalisation en situation réelle'; 'L'expert pronostique un risque d'intensification majeur du travail des rédacteurs'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"\"un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"\"Le tribunal judiciaire de Créteil, saisi par le Comité social et économique (CSE) de Gisi\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s4"},{"locator":"\"des risques de surcharge de travail (...) et une baisse de la qualité du travail fourni, de l'autonomie et du conflit de valeur, de la perte de sens et de l'altération du collectif\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The judge found that implementing the generative-AI project and the dismissal of all sub-editor posts on an approximate evaluation, without real-situation testing or participation of the staff concerned, presented a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of Gisi staff, and that Gisi had not shown prevention measures although its 2025 risk register listed three AI-related risks including stress linked to AI-related job insecurity.","causal_attribution":"The court's own finding; it concerns a risk to health created by the way the AI-based reorganisation was to be deployed, not an individually diagnosed injury."},{"id":"c3","status":"documented","evidence":[{"locator":"Page 2: 'La société GISI emploie 127 salariés dont 92 journalistes'; 'un outil dénommé DIGI'; 'Le projet de la société GISI prévoit la suppression de 8 postes de secrétaires de rédaction (SR) et la création de 2 postes de chefs d'édition reprenant une partie des missions des SR, à savoir celles ne pouvant être automatisées par l'outil DIGI'; 'Le 4 mai 2026 le CSE était convié à une réunion dite R0 de présentation du projet'; 'Le 12 mai 2026 la société GISI convoquait le CSE à une première réunion d'information/consultation sur deux projets'; 'le CSE de la société GISI obtenait le 15 juillet 2025 une ordonnance de référé'; 'Par un arrêt du 21 mai 2026 la cour d'appel de Paris confirmait l'ordonnance de référé du 15 juillet 2025'. Page 10: 'la société GISI a évalué à environ 70 % la part des tâches des SR réalisées par l'outil IA'.","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"\"Au sein de Gisi, 8 postes de SR sont menacés\"; \"la société estimant que 70% des tâches des SR peuvent être réalisées par l'IA\"; \"Des reclassements ont été proposés à tous les secrétaires de rédaction\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"\"avait déjà contrainte à ouvrir un processus d\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Gisi (127 staff, 92 journalists) planned to remove its eight sub-editor posts and create two chef d'édition posts for the tasks its in-house generative-AI tool DIGI could not automate, estimating that the tool would perform about 70% of sub-editor tasks; the project was presented to the CSE on 4 May 2026 and consultation opened on 12 May 2026, after an earlier July 2025 order (confirmed on appeal on 21 May 2026) had required consultation before AI tools were used.","causal_attribution":"Facts recited in the court order and reported by AFP from the company."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"\"Les quelque 250 journalistes de ces 26 titres au total avaient lancé une grève au printemps pour s'opposer au projet de leur propriétaire de supprimer 19 postes de secrétaires de rédaction\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"},{"locator":"\"Nous allons poursuivre les tests et faire des numéros complets\"; \"la direction de Gisi a indiqué se réserver la possibilité de faire appel\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s5"},{"locator":"\"nous suspendons le projet le temps de finaliser ces tests\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"Some 250 journalists across Infopro Digital's 26 titles struck in spring 2026 against the owner's plan to cut 19 sub-editor posts because of the AI deployment; after the order Gisi's president said the tests would continue with full pilot issues and that the company reserved the right to appeal.","causal_attribution":"AFP reporting of the strike and of management's reaction; L'Informé carries management's written reply."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"\"with five of the eight affected journalists having already received pre-dismissal interview letters\"; \"newsroom positions accompanied by training were offered to all affected editorial secretaries, although some declined them\".","relation":"supports","source_id":"s6"}],"assertion":"Digital Watch, citing Stratégies, reports that five of the eight affected sub-editors had already received pre-dismissal interview letters and that Gisi had offered three chef d'édition roles and one technical editor-in-chief position, with newsroom posts offered to all affected sub-editors, some of whom declined.","causal_attribution":"Secondary summary attributing the detail to Stratégies (not readable from this host); reported only. Its count of three chef d'édition roles differs from the two posts in the order."}],"effects":[{"label":"eight sub-editors faced collective dismissal in favour of a generative-AI tool; a court found a serious risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://linforme.files.sirius.press/files/1789566133007-SECURISE_ordonnance%20du%2015%20septembre%202026-2.pdf","kind":"court_order","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Court record: Tribunal judiciaire de Créteil, section des référés, ordonnance de référé of 15 September 2026, RG 26/00991, CSE de la société Gisi v. SAS Gisi, published by L'Informé (watermarked, 12 scanned pages without a text layer). Pages 1, 2, 10, 11 and 12 read visually in French on 2026-09-19; pages 3-9 not read. Quotations are transcribed from the page images.","independence_group":"tj-creteil-order"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://www.linforme.com/medias-culture/article/lsa-l-usine-nouvelle-la-justice-retoque-le-remplacement-des-journalistes-par-l-ia_8645.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-09-19 (L'Informé, 15 Sep 2026, updated 16 Sep with Infopro Digital's reaction). The served page truncates the opening paragraph; the court's findings, the penalty, the union reaction and management's reply are readable. L'Informé published the order.","independence_group":"linforme"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://www.cbnews.fr/medias/justice-suspend-projet-suppressions-postes-liees-ia-chez-usine-nouvelle-lsa","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-09-19 (CB News, 16 Sep 2026, AFP dispatch). AFP states it consulted the decision; carries Gisi president Isabelle André's comments.","independence_group":"afp"},{"id":"s4","url":"https://www.bfmtv.com/economie/emploi/vie-de-bureau/un-risque-grave-et-caracterise-sur-la-sante-physique-et-mentale-la-justice-suspend-un-projet-de-suppressions-de-postes-liees-a-l-ia-dans-les-medias-du-groupe-gisi_AD-202609160444.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-09-19 (BFM Business with AFP, 16 Sep 2026). Same AFP dispatch with a definition of the sub-editor role.","independence_group":"afp"},{"id":"s5","url":"https://www.liberation.fr/economie/medias/la-justice-suspend-un-projet-de-suppressions-de-postes-liees-a-lia-dans-le-groupe-de-presse-infopro-digital-20260916_H7LH5VX6A5EDBFWSDNNM3DPB3U/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"fr","translation_note":"Read in French on 2026-09-19 via the MSN content API copy (Libération, 16 Sep 2026, AFP). Same dispatch, adding the staff representative and SNJ-CGT reactions given to L'Informé.","independence_group":"afp"},{"id":"s6","url":"https://dig.watch/updates/french-court-ai-job-cuts-journalists","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"en","translation_note":"Read in English on 2026-09-19 (Digital Watch Observatory, 17 Sep 2026). A secondary summary that attributes the pre-dismissal-letter and redeployment details to Stratégies, whose own article returns 403 to this host.","independence_group":"strategies-via-digital-watch"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["Whether Gisi has appealed the order.","Whether the pre-dismissal procedure for the sub-editors has been formally withdrawn and whether all eight remain employed; individual health effects are not reported.","Pages 3-9 of the order (the parties' submissions) were not read.","The status of Groupe Moniteur's separate redundancy plan (PSE) covering the remaining sub-editor posts.","Digital Watch, citing Stratégies, reports three chef d'édition roles offered; the order and AFP record two chef d'édition posts. The difference (offers versus created posts, or a Stratégies error) is unresolved."],"geography":{"basis":"Gisi is registered in Créteil with its seat in Gentilly (Val-de-Marne) per the order; the staff work for its French titles; court: Tribunal judiciaire de Créteil.","court_countries":["FR"],"event_countries":["FR"],"affected_person_countries":["FR"]},"publication":{"basis":"Published under the 2026-09-15 charter as a work-lane case of an institutional AI decision with concrete consequences for identified staff: eight sub-editors were subject to a collective dismissal plan justified by a generative-AI tool, and a court found the deployment presented a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff and suspended it. The court order (primary record), L'Informé and AFP copies read; the affected people are unnamed.","reviewed_on":"2026-09-19"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The court order and AFP identify the generative-AI tool (DIGI) as the basis of the reorganisation and of the dismissal of the eight sub-editor posts, and the court's health-risk finding concerns deploying that tool without real-situation testing. The tool did not communicate with, decide about or depict the affected people; it was to take over their tasks, so none of the listed relations applies and the relation is recorded as unknown.","status":"supported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Créteil, France: a court suspended Gisi's (Infopro Digital) plan to cut eight sub-editor posts in favour of a generative-AI tool, finding a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff","summary":"Gisi, the Infopro Digital subsidiary publishing L'Usine nouvelle, LSA and L'Argus de l'assurance (127 staff, 92 journalists), presented to its works council (CSE) on 4 May 2026 a reorganisation built around 'DIGI', an in-house generative-AI editorial tool, and on 12 May 2026 opened consultation on the reorganisation and on the resulting collective dismissal of its eight secrétaires de rédaction (sub-editors), to be replaced by two chefs d'édition, on the company's estimate that the tool would take over about 70% of sub-editor tasks. Some 250 journalists across Infopro Digital's 26 titles had struck in spring 2026 against a group-wide plan to cut 19 sub-editor posts, and according to Digital Watch (citing Stratégies) five of the eight Gisi sub-editors had received pre-dismissal interview letters. The CSE, relying on an expert report, went to the Créteil judicial court in July. On 15 September 2026 the référé judge found that deploying the plan without real-situation testing presented 'un risque grave et caractérisé sur la santé physique et mentale de plusieurs catégories de salariés', ordered the suspension of the reorganisation and the collective dismissal (including the redeployment processes) until real-situation tests and full pilot issues are produced, with a provisional penalty of 8,000 euros per day for three months, and refused the damages provision. Gisi said it would continue the tests and reserved the right to appeal.","incidentDate":"2026-05-04","incidentKind":"ongoing_experience","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"product_change","reportedDate":"2026-09-15","aiSystem":"'DIGI', Gisi's in-house generative-AI editorial tool (transcription of interviews, drafting and correction help; planned spelling, grammar and typography correction, editorial-coherence and fact-reliability checks)","aiProduct":"DIGI editorial tool","aiCompany":"Gisi (Groupe Industrie Service Infos), a subsidiary of Infopro Digital (deployer of the in-house 'DIGI' generative-AI tool)","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"unverified","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Eight sub-editors at Gisi faced collective dismissal because a generative-AI tool was to take over most of their tasks (five had received pre-dismissal interview letters, per Digital Watch citing Stratégies), and a court found that the plan, deployed without real-situation testing, presented a serious and characterised risk to the physical and mental health of several categories of staff; the court suspended the dismissals pending tests.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"supported","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":8,"affectedCountStatus":"partial","affectedCountEvidence":"The order suspends 'le projet de licenciement collectif (des 8 secrétaires de rédaction)' and AFP reports eight sub-editor posts threatened at Gisi; Digital Watch, citing Stratégies, says five of the eight had received pre-dismissal interview letters. The court's health-risk finding extends to 'plusieurs catégories de salariés' without a number. Eight counted plus unquantified others: partial.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"FR","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_ongoing","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://linforme.files.sirius.press/files/1789566133007-SECURISE_ordonnance%20du%2015%20septembre%202026-2.pdf","primarySourceLabel":"Tribunal judiciaire de Créteil, ordonnance de référé of 15 September 2026 (RG 26/00991), CSE de la société Gisi v. SAS Gisi, as published by L'Informé","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-20T03:19:47.791082+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:37.711237+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["work","journalism","layoffs","generative-ai","newsroom-automation","france","creteil","labour-court","occupational-health","institutional-use"]},{"id":"2026-darron-lee-chatgpt-ooltewah-killing","metadataReview":{"version":1,"geography":{"basis":"Geographic fields reviewed against the cited retained dossier passages. This is a metadata review, not a new source or causal review. Residence, event setting and court are recorded separately. Affected-person countries refer to reported location or residence, not citizenship or a complete residence history.","evidence":[{"kind":"existing_record","locator":"at their Ooltewah, Tennessee home","location":"summary","supports":["event_countries","affected_person_countries"],"countries":["US"]},{"kind":"existing_record","locator":"Hamilton County Criminal Court","location":"outcome_details","supports":["court_countries"],"countries":["US"]}],"court_countries":["US"],"event_countries":["US"],"affected_person_countries":["US"]},"unresolved":["Source languages remain unreviewed; no source body was newly inspected for this record during this metadata pass."],"reviewed_on":"2026-09-15","source_reviews":[]},"name":"State v. Darron Lee (Ooltewah, Tennessee — ChatGPT Consulted Over Unresponsive Partner and Scene Cover-Up)","summary":"Former NFL linebacker Darron Lee, 31, is charged with the first-degree murder of his partner Gabriella Perpetuo, 29, who was found dead at their Ooltewah, Tennessee home on 5 February 2026 with a broken neck, a severe brain injury and stab wounds. Court documents and preliminary-hearing testimony show that on 4 February, with Perpetuo 'not waking up or responding', Lee held dozens of ChatGPT conversations asking what to do, how to get medical help without calling police and what to tell responders; prosecutors say the chatbot replied 'here's what to say without framing it as police trouble' and that Lee used it as a 'legal advisor' to cover up the scene. Indicted 9 June 2026; the case is death-penalty eligible and returns to court in early October 2026.","incidentDate":"2026-02-04","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"range","exposurePattern":"repeated_interactions","reportedDate":"2026-03-09","aiSystem":"ChatGPT","aiProduct":"ChatGPT","aiCompany":"OpenAI","severity":"critical","verificationStatus":"verified","harmCategories":["third_party_harm_facilitation","crisis_response"],"harmOutcomes":["death","harm_to_others","legal_harm","loss_of_liberty"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"Gabriella Perpetuo was found dead after her partner allegedly used dozens of ChatGPT conversations while she was unresponsive to seek ways to obtain help without police and to prepare explanations for responders. He is charged with murder.","frameworkFacets":["P1a","P1b","P1c","P1d","P5b","P5d"],"pathwayDirection":"outward","causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":1,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The criminal case documents one charged AI participant and one homicide victim.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"US-TN","platformType":"assistant","outcomeType":"criminal_charges","outcomeStatus":"ongoing","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ex-nfl-linebacker-charged-killing-girlfriend-allegedly-asked-chatgpt-a-rcna262824","primarySourceLabel":"NBC News — 'Ex-NFL linebacker charged with killing girlfriend asked ChatGPT for advice before calling 911, court documents say'","firstPublishedAt":"2026-09-05T03:05:17.159653+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-09-30T01:17:34.046199+00:00","scopeVersion":"participant-v2","tags":["criminal","adult","violence","chatgpt","us","third-party-harm","intimate-partner","cover-up","crisis-response","tennessee"]}]}