12 May 2026 to 28 Aug 2026RomaniaUnidentified document-generation tool
The prosecutors' office attached to the Giurgiu district court in Romania said on 30 October 2026 that it had begun criminal proceedings for continued fraud against a detained man who, according to the evidence gathered, falsely presented himself as a lawyer between 12 May and 28 August 2026 and, using applications that use artificial intelligence, drew up documents purportedly issued by courts, including the Bucharest Court of Appeal and the Giurgiu district court. According to the prosecutors, the injured person handed over a total of 47,896 lei, and also a pig, as payment for the supposed legal services. The prosecutors asked the court to remand him in custody for 30 days. He is presumed innocent.
Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 01/11/2026
5 Jun 2026 to 30 Sept 2026United KingdomMicrosoft Copilot
In a care-proceedings judgment dated 30 September 2026 ([2026] EWFC 306, Family Court sitting at Truro), the judge examined how an expert instructed in the case, whom the judgment calls an ISW (an independent social worker), had prepared a parenting assessment of the father, two addenda and two kinship assessments of maternal relatives between June and September 2026. The judgment records that she disclosed no AI use in her first report and, when asked, wrote that Microsoft Copilot had been used to organise information and assist in drafting. Text that the judge identified as Copilot's own summary appeared in both kinship assessments, and in oral evidence she said Copilot summarises her transcribed notes and generates her report, confirming that one kinship assessment was entirely AI-generated from her notes. The judge found that the analysis of the evidence, headings, layout and construction of the reports were AI-generated, that this was a higher-risk use which affected the weight of the reports, and that the leftover Copilot text showed inadequate human oversight. The parenting assessment also contained factual errors (it said the father accepted the court's findings, and called a child autistic without a diagnosis); the judge said it was not clear whether these came from the AI or the original notes. Citing both the AI use and a lack of rigour, the judge found that no significant weight could be placed on the ISW's evidence, and made final care orders for the three children. The judge saw no significant issue in the use of Copilot for transcription and grammar and noted it is a closed, secure tool.
Core concern Low reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 29/10/2026
Event date unknownBrazilMicrosoft text-to-speech (reported)
A professional voice actor sued a São Paulo shopping centre, saying it used the actor's voice without authorisation in a marketing campaign shown on YouTube, and claimed lost earnings and moral damages. The centre answered that the voice was not the actor's but a synthetic voice produced with Microsoft's text-to-speech service, available to the public. According to the legal news site ConJur, a judge of the 18th Civil Court accepted that the voice was produced synthetically and dismissed the claim; on appeal the actor argued that a notarised record attesting to the similarity of the voices had never been assessed. The 6th Private Law Chamber of the São Paulo Court of Justice annulled that judgment for curtailment of the defence, holding that the use of AI does not by itself rule out misuse of third parties' rights, and sent the case back for evidence on how the campaign voice was generated and how similar it is to the actor's. The court docket shows the case back at first instance at the court-expert stage in 2025; no ruling on the merits is reported. Whether the AI voice reproduces the actor's voice is disputed.
Core concern Low reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 2 sources · Added 26/10/2026
Event date unknownItalyUnidentified chatbot
In October 2026 Italian outlets, relaying Il Sole 24 Ore, reported that the Agenzia delle Entrate (the Italian Revenue Agency) had suspended two staff members of its first provincial directorate in Naples from their posts for improper use of artificial intelligence and assigned them to study and research duties at the regional directorate, and that it had opened an internal audit. The reports link the measures to judgment 4759/2026 of the Campania second-instance tax court, which, according to these reports, found that the tax office had put questions to online AI systems while checking a company's research and development tax credit and held that the answers could not serve as evidence. A joint note from six unions expressed deep disappointment at the suspensions and announced initiatives to protect the staff of the directorate. The reports differ on the two people's roles (two managers, or a manager and an official); their names are not published.
AI relation unknown Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 26/10/2026
2025RussiaAntiplagiat AI-text detector
RAPSI and BIZNES Online reported on 8 and 10 June 2026 that the Supreme Court of Tatarstan upheld a ruling that a private Moscow university unlawfully expelled a distance-learning student in 2025 over suspected use of AI in her graduation thesis. According to the university's representatives in court as reported, the Antiplagiat.Vuz system first showed about 41% (41.91%) AI-generated text, her supervisor then said the word order had been deliberately disturbed in more than 70% of the text, and a third check showed 11.92%. BIZNES Online also reports, from the court documents, that a university representative told the court the supervisor does not operate the checking system and had not in fact analysed the text for neural-network generation, and could not explain how the system distinguishes borrowed text from AI generation. The university refused the revised work as late (uploaded on Monday 9 June 2025 against a deadline of 8 June) and expelled her; the department's protocol cited a breach of good-faith work in the Antiplagiat.Vuz system. She denied using AI. In January 2026 the Vakhitovsky District Court of Kazan held the expulsion unlawful, ordered her reinstatement for a check of her thesis and, if it met the originality threshold, admission to the defence, and awarded 40,000 roubles in moral damages and a 20,000-rouble fine. The Supreme Court of Tatarstan dismissed the university's appeal: it held that the probabilistic report had not been checked by a competent expert and could not be the sole proof of bad faith, noted that the same text was classified as AI-generated in one report and not in another, and found no evidence that any flagged fragments resulted from her deliberate acts rather than her sources or an incorrect algorithm. The courts also held the deadline had been miscounted.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 25/10/2026
2024ItalyUnidentified image tool
In 2024 an associate professor at the University of Genoa took photos from the social-media profiles of six students, turned them into sexual images and shared them in Telegram chats. According to la Repubblica's October 2024 report, Genoa prosecutors accused him of 'undressing' the photos with apps that use artificial intelligence; the investigation began on 1 October 2024 after the rector's complaint, the postal police searched his office and home, and he was suspended. The university later dismissed him. According to Open and Fanpage, which report the judgment, the regional administrative court for Liguria (TAR) rejected his appeal against the dismissal in September 2026, citing a search record that found sexual virtual images on his computer matching those posted, and his interrogation, in which he admitted posting the images and creating them with software. The court found the repeated conduct harmful to the students' dignity and to the university. The criminal case, for aggravated defamation, was closed; the lecturer paid the students compensation. The tool used is not identified.
Core concern High reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 24/10/2026
9 Oct 2026CanadaUnidentified image tool (suspected)
A woman in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, told Global News that a duct-cleaning crew she booked through a Facebook Marketplace advert came to her home on 9 October 2026, showed her a phone photo of a dirty furnace motor, raised the price to $300 and then showed her a photo of a motor that looked almost new as proof the job was done. When she checked after the crew left, she says, the motor was still dirty. An AI researcher at the University at Buffalo and two students, examining the photos for Global News, found a Google SynthID watermark on the clean-motor photo; the researcher said the AI detector Sightengine gave it a 99 per cent AI score and called the result their strongest evidence that the image may come from AI. She says the company denied wrongdoing and refunded her only after repeated complaints; Halifax police told her it was a civil matter.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified AI-text detector
A case summary published in July 2025 by the Office of the Independent Adjudicator for Higher Education (OIA), the independent student complaints scheme for England and Wales, describes a student with autism who was accused of including large sections of AI-generated content in an essay. The student denied using AI and submitted planning and notes. A disciplinary panel, which had the provider's AI detection software report and compared the essay with other work by the student, found academic misconduct and gave a mark of zero with any reassessment capped at a pass; the provider rejected the appeal, in which the student said the same software had earlier flagged another of their essays in a case where it had been agreed they had not used AI. The OIA found the complaint Justified: the panel had not properly considered the student's evidence, had not shared some evidence it relied on, and had not given sufficient reasons. It recommended reconsideration and changes to the provider's rules, and the student told the OIA that on reconsideration the provider decided there had been no misconduct. The provider and the software are not named.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 23/10/2026
Aug 2026 to Sept 2026TaiwanMicrosoft Copilot (reported)
CTWANT reported on 22 October 2026 two rulings of the Taipei District Court in Taiwan. In August 2026 a civil division dismissed a retrial petition into which, it said, the petitioner had only pasted his conversations with Microsoft Copilot's generative AI; it said this was not in itself impermissible but that retrial grounds had not been lawfully stated, and that his copying of online news articles into Copilot and then of the whole exchange into his filing was a statement of his opinion and not objective evidence. He petitioned again and, in September 2026, a three-judge panel of another civil division said the new petition appeared to be generative AI conversation content placed in the filing, found that he had repeatedly petitioned on the same or similar grounds with a malicious purpose of wasting judicial resources, and fined him NT$30,000 under Article 249-1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, warning that further abusive filings could bring a heavier fine. CTWANT describes it as the first court fine in Taiwan for abusive litigation with AI. The underlying claim, about fraudsters' misuse of his mobile number, had already been finally rejected. The rulings themselves were not inspected.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 23/10/2026
30 Sept 2024Event location unknownBaidu AI smart answer
A practising lawyer in Nanjing, China, found in September 2024 that Baidu search's 'AI smart answer' (AI 智能回答) feature, asked how many years he had been sentenced to, answered that he had been sentenced to three years in prison for a criminal offence and showed his photograph in a lawyer's robe. According to the first-instance judgment as quoted in the press, the answer was produced on 30 September 2024. The lawyer says he complained repeatedly to Baidu by letter, hotline and email without the content being fully removed, and he sued. The Jiangbei New Area People's Court in Nanjing found that Baidu had combined text and his picture through AI into false, disparaging content aimed at him, that Baidu was at fault, and that this was defamation; it ordered a written apology and rejected his claims for lost income and emotional damages for lack of evidence. Baidu argued that AI hallucinations could not be foreseen. The Nanjing Intermediate People's Court dismissed Baidu's appeal on 12 March 2026. The lawyer applied for enforcement when no apology came, and in September 2026 said he had received Baidu's written apology; Baidu has applied for a retrial.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 22/10/2026
Sept 2026Event location unknownUnidentified image tool
In mid-September 2026 two versions of an image that appeared to show US President Donald Trump kissing a woman on a golf course spread on social media, where posters presumed the woman was a named White House aide and treated the scene as evidence of an intimate relationship. Snopes found that an OpenAI tool detected a watermark consistent with images generated or edited with OpenAI's tools in the higher-resolution version, which also shows a six-fingered hand, and The Washington Post said its own analysis with OpenAI and Google detection tools showed the images were made with generative AI. A White House official called the image clearly a fake photo. Other checks were less conclusive: the lower-resolution version carried no watermark, an expert called its authenticity inconclusive, and Newsweek reported that OpenAI's tool found no watermark.
Core concern Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources · Added 22/10/2026
Jun 2025 to Aug 2025AustraliaUnidentified chatbot
A senior software developer employed for more than 11 years by Fujifilm Data Management Solutions in Australia was dismissed for serious misconduct on 7 August 2025 after a workplace bullying complaint escalated into a stream of complaint emails to managers. In [2026] FWC 835 (18 March 2026) the Fair Work Commission recorded that he agreed he relied on an AI large language model to prepare the emails, found that drafts were generated by AI, and recorded managers' unchallenged evidence that he appeared to consult ChatGPT during meetings. It found the emails inappropriate, combative and disproportionate, and said his use of AI 'was counterproductive. It led to his demise', appearing to give him a false sense of security. Because he accepted responsibility, the tribunal did not treat the AI use as an excuse; it held the dismissal was not unfair and dismissed his application. A Full Bench refused permission to appeal on 2 July 2026.
Core concern Medium reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 21/10/2026
Dec 2025United StatesUnidentified video tool (suspected)
In December 2025 a high school in Delaware County, Pennsylvania, told families about an AI-generated video reported to depict several students inappropriately. Parents told the Philadelphia Inquirer that five freshman girls were told by boys that a male classmate had made sexual videos of them; the girls never saw the videos. The parents say police told them the classmate acknowledged making videos of the girls dancing in thong bikinis with an app later deleted from his phone. A January 2026 district message, which the district says was co-written by the police, said a student used an app that animates publicly available photos to make them appear to move and dance, and that no evidence of anything inappropriate was found. The township police said they had investigated the possible use of AI to generate non-consensual sexualized imagery of multiple juveniles and charged a juvenile with harassment. One mother said everyone stared at her daughter at school and that she felt no one believed her. The app is unnamed and the videos were not recovered.
Core concern Medium reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources · Added 18/10/2026
Aug 2026MalaysiaUnidentified image tool
Negeri Sembilan police said on 17 October 2026, in a statement reported by Bernama and RTM, that they had received five reports, lodged by parents or guardians between 20 and 23 August 2026, over the circulation of photographs of female students at a secondary school in Seremban that were edited using AI to resemble pornographic images. The police describe the victims as aged 14 to 17 and the suspect as an upper-secondary student whom the school suspended for five days in August; the case is being investigated under child sexual offences law and the Penal Code. A lawyer for a group of parents told a press conference that the images came to light on 12 August, when a younger pupil found them on an unlocked phone at school, alleged that the student made about 200 such images, and said the school had acknowledged more than 300 affected girls at a September meeting; he said there is no direct evidence that the images were sold. A mother said her child still has trouble sleeping every night. After the girls were questioned at the police headquarters on 17 October, their lawyers alleged that police had made them face the suspect during identification. The AI tool is not identified.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 7 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 18/10/2026
8 Oct 2026IsraelUnidentified AI tool
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.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 16/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited StatesUnidentified image tool
The Parker County Sheriff's Office in Texas says a juvenile confessed to taking photographs of a younger child and using AI to alter them so that the child appeared nude, and that evidence from the teenager's devices and TikTok account showed photos of at least three other juvenile victims were transformed the same way and uploaded to TikTok. The case began with a July tip from TikTok to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The sheriff's office says all victims were identified and their families notified. The teenager faces felony charges, including possession of child pornography, and awaits juvenile court proceedings; the account is the sheriff's office's, relayed by CBS Texas and FOX 4 on 14 October 2026, and the charges are untried.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Criminal Charges
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 15/10/2026
Event date unknownUnited KingdomUnidentified chatbot
Derbyshire Police said in June 2026 that it had launched a criminal investigation into an allegation of perverting the course of justice after the alleged use of AI systems by an officer to create evidential material in a number of cases, and that the officer had been removed from frontline duties; no arrests had been made. The Crown Prosecution Service said it was engaging with defence teams and the courts in appropriate cases. Scottish Legal News, citing sources familiar with the matter, reported that the detective allegedly used an AI chatbot to prepare documents including victim impact statements and case summaries for prosecutors. It also reported that a number of rape convictions were being reviewed. In October 2026 the head of the Independent Office for Police Conduct referred to the case when warning that AI mistakes could lead to a mistrial. The officer is not named, the AI system is not identified, and the allegations have not been tested.
AI relation unknown Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 4 sources, 3 underlying accounts · Added 14/10/2026
11 Oct 2026Event location unknownPangram AI-text detector
A week after a Zimbabwean writer won the £10,000 2026 Caine Prize for African Writing, The Atlantic published an article on Sunday 11 October 2026 whose central evidence was a scan by Pangram, an AI-text detection tool, flagging almost the entire winning story as AI-generated. The Caine Prize said it had begun a review: according to its chair, the author would send documentation of his drafts and the prize was talking to the judges and to the magazine that first published the story. The chair told the BBC that The Atlantic had published before a full investigation, tainting the prize and the winner, and said a detector should not be the final arbiter. The author denied using AI and said he had a documented history of the story's development; his literary agency said it was confident the story was his own work. No finding has been announced.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 14/10/2026
27 Aug 2026United StatesGPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 5 (reported)
A kindergarten teacher at a public elementary school in Concord, Massachusetts, was dismissed in August 2025 after an unsatisfactory evaluation. In arbitration she argued that some of the principal's evaluations may have been produced with AI, relying on GPTZero estimates; the principal denied using AI beyond grammar checks. According to the arbitration decision as reported by The Concord Bridge, the arbitrator stated in an appendix that he used two AI tools, GPT-5.4 and Claude Opus 5, to research whether GPTZero was reliable, checked some of the sources they supplied, concluded that GPTZero's results deserved no weight, and upheld the dismissal on 27 August 2026. On 28 September 2026 the teacher asked Suffolk Superior Court to vacate the decision, alleging that the AI-assisted research was an improper investigation outside the hearing record that the parties were not told about or allowed to challenge. These are allegations in a complaint; the district declined to comment and no court has ruled.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources · Added 14/10/2026
1 Sept 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI drafting tool
In a pending appeal against a decision of Austria's data protection authority, the Federal Administrative Court (BVwG) found that the appellant had filed hundreds of pages of statements and attachments within less than four months that were obviously created exclusively with large-language-model text programs and not labelled as AI-generated. In a decision of 1 September 2026 the court imposed a EUR 200 penalty for wanton use of the court, holding that the AI-assisted filings repeated the same complaints, brought no new facts or evidence and ignored the EU labelling duty for AI-generated content. The court announced it as the first such penalty for AI submissions. The appellant is anonymised and the appellant's response is not reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 13/10/2026