22 Oct 2026Event location unknownTikTok LIVE age check (reported)
A 28-year-old member of an idol group said that on 22 October 2026 TikTok ended her live stream, which was also promoting her birthday event two days later, because it judged her to be under 18, the minimum age for live streaming. In an emergency video posted the same day she said the stated reason was that people under 18 cannot stream after 10 pm and that she could not continue. Real Sound reports that the AI judged her to be under 18 and the stream was abruptly cut off; on X she wrote 'TikTok LIVE, I won't forgive you (28, female)' and later called herself a 28-year-old idol judged a minor by AI. Fans treated the episode as a joke and it drew wide attention. TikTok's comment and whether her appeal succeeded are not reported.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 02/11/2026
1 May 2021BrazilUnidentified death-record matching system
A Brazilian federal judge in the 4th federal region ordered the social security institute (INSS) to pay a retiree R$3,917.67 in moral damages after finding that his pension had been stopped by a failure of the institute's artificial intelligence system, according to a Federal Regional Court of the 4th Region (TRF4) news item relayed by the Brazilian Institute of Social Security Law on 30 September 2022. The judge explained that the benefit was suspended automatically on 1 May 2021 by an artificial intelligence command that captured data from the death-records system (Sisobi), and that the data used, the person's name and mother's name, were not enough to prevent the wrongful cessation. The retiree said the pension was his only source of income; he asked for reactivation and sent a handwritten declaration, and although he showed in person that he was alive, the benefit was restored only in January 2022. The judge wrote that the AI 'proved inefficient or unintelligent' in this case and that the INSS made him wait 226 days. Arrears were also ordered paid. Whether the INSS appealed is not reported.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 02/11/2026
Jan 2021United StatesHireVue (reported)
A man who applied for a supply chain job with CVS in Massachusetts around January 2021 says CVS put him through a HireVue video interview with questions about integrity, and alleges that HireVue sent the recording to a platform called Affectiva, which analysed his facial expressions, eye contact, voice intonation and inflection with artificial intelligence and fed a score to CVS. He sued CVS in a proposed class action under the Massachusetts Lie Detector Statute, alleging the interview was a lie detector test and that the online application lacked the notice of rights the law requires. He says he did not know the interview was a lie detector test and would not have taken part had he known. In February 2024 a federal judge in Massachusetts denied CVS's motion to dismiss the notice claim, finding a concrete informational injury; CVS had not challenged the other claims at that stage. A law firm commentary says he was not hired. In July 2024 he reached an individual settlement with CVS, whose terms were not reported. The allegations about the AI analysis were not tested in court.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Lawsuit Settled
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 02/11/2026
2024Event location unknownGemini (reported)
A civil court in Niterói, Rio de Janeiro state, ordered Google Brasil to pay a businessman R$20,000 in moral damages in a sentence dated 12 May 2025. The judge found it undisputed that the company's artificial intelligence had pointed to him in searches as the owner of a gambling platform called 7 Games, with which he had no connection, as the company register showed. The court found that the false information damaged his reputation: he was being held responsible for scams on the betting platform and received threats by email from its customers. The court had earlier granted an injunction to remove the association, and the sentence confirmed it. Google argued that it does not host the material shown in its results and only organises pages available on the web; the judge held Google responsible because the information came from its own platform rather than from a linked page. Conjur, a legal-news site, identifies the tool as Gemini and reports that the association began after an interview in which he recommended seven games; the sentence names no product. Whether Google appealed is not reported.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Filed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 02/11/2026
Oct 2023NetherlandsMONOcam (reported)
Dutch police use mobile smart cameras that apply artificial intelligence to photos of passing drivers to detect whether they are holding a mobile phone; a police officer then reviews each flagged photo before a fine is issued. A driver says that in October 2023, on the A2 motorway near Weert, such a camera photographed him with his right hand at his head and that he received a fine of 380 euros plus 9 euros in administration costs for holding a mobile device while driving. He says the flash photo, which he requested from the Central Judicial Collection Agency (CJIB), shows his empty hand near his face: he was scratching his head, his lease car allows hands-free calling, and he is left-handed. In a February 2024 blog post he writes that the camera was a MONOcam, that its algorithm judged that he was holding a device and that the reviewing police employee accepted that judgement, so that both the algorithm and a person erred; RTL Nieuws reported that the photo was probably taken by a MONOcam. Omroep Brabant described the fine as a mistake by the AI camera. The driver said the reviewing officer was probably biased by the algorithm's output and that a dark shadow in his hand could mislead a quick look. He lodged an objection with the Public Prosecution Service; it had not been decided when the reports appeared in February 2024, and a CJIB spokesperson, who would not comment on individual cases, suggested to RTL that he was unlikely to have to pay. No later outcome has been reported. He also told Omroep Brabant that he considers the cameras valuable for road safety, provided doubtful cases are not fined.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources · Added 01/11/2026
Apr 2019United KingdomHM Passport Office photo checker
The UK government's online passport application uses an automated face-detection check that tells applicants when it thinks an uploaded photo breaks the rules, which include a neutral expression and a closed mouth. In September 2019 PA reported that a young Black man renewing his passport online said the checker mistook his lips for an open mouth, and that to submit the photo anyway he had to write in a comment box that his mouth was closed and he just had big lips. PA also reported that a Black educational technologist said the system told her that her eyes looked closed and that it could not find the outline of her head; she told the BBC she uploaded 10 photographs over a week and each was rated poor, and PA reported that the Passport Office tweeted that it was sorry the service had not worked as it should. In October 2020 a BBC investigation reported that a Black student said she was wrongly told her mouth looked open on each of five photos and got one accepted only by writing a note challenging the verdict. The BBC fed 1,130 passport-style photos of politicians into the checker and found that photos of dark-skinned women were graded poor quality 22% of the time against 14% for light-skinned women; it reported that documents released under a 2019 freedom of information request showed the Home Office knew of the problem but judged overall performance good enough to launch. The Home Office said applicants can override the check, that the checker is a customer aid, and that its systems are improving.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Media Coverage
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 29/10/2026
2019Event location unknownSiri
On 26 July 2019 the Guardian reported that contractors grading a small share of Siri recordings for Apple regularly heard confidential information. Its anonymous source, a contractor, said Siri was often activated by mistake, for example by the sound of a zip, and that these accidental activations captured private discussions between doctors and patients, business deals, apparently criminal dealings and sexual encounters, with location, contact details and app data attached. Apple told the Guardian that requests were not linked to users' Apple IDs and that less than 1% of daily activations were graded. On 28 August 2019 Apple apologised, said it had suspended human grading, and said audio would no longer be retained by default, grading would become opt-in and recordings found to be inadvertent triggers would be deleted. Device owners' class action, Lopez v. Apple in the federal court in Oakland, alleged that Apple recorded private conversations after unintended Siri activations and disclosed them to third parties. Apple agreed to pay $95 million while denying wrongdoing, and co-class counsel say the judge granted final approval on 16 October 2025.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Settled
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources · Added 29/10/2026
1 Mar 2023 to 22 Jun 2023Event location unknownChatGPT
In a passenger's personal-injury suit against the airline Avianca in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, an opposition brief filed on 1 March 2023 cited judicial opinions that did not exist. The court found that the lawyer who did the research had used ChatGPT, which fabricated the cases, and that when he asked the chatbot whether one of them was real it replied that it had supplied real authorities that could be found on legal databases. On 22 June 2023 the court found bad faith by the two lawyers, based on their conduct after the citations were questioned, and imposed a USD 5,000 penalty jointly on them and their firm, together with letters to the client and to each judge falsely named as an author of the fake opinions.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 2 sources · Added 28/10/2026
2020NetherlandsProctorio
During the 2020/21 academic year, when exams at VU Amsterdam were held online because of the pandemic, some exams required students to run Proctorio proctoring software, which according to the Netherlands Institute for Human Rights used face-detection algorithms during a pre-exam webcam check to judge whether the student was in view. A master's student says the software had trouble recognising her, that she regularly received 'face not found' or 'room too dark' messages, lost time, shone a bright lamp into her face while taking exams, and experienced stress and a feeling of insecurity; she suspected the failures were linked to her dark skin and complained to the Institute in July 2022. In an interim ruling of 7 December 2022 the Institute found sufficient indications for a presumption of discrimination. In its final ruling of 17 October 2023 it found that the university had proved it had not discriminated against her by using Proctorio: on the exam where her setup took longer than average (31 March 2021), the webcam check failed three times and she passed within eight seconds after the helpdesk advised her to remove her glasses, a known Proctorio problem the Institute treated as unrelated to skin colour; a restart during that exam was very likely caused by an unstable internet connection; and it considered it plausible that she had no need to keep a lamp shining in her face for long periods. It found that the university had discriminated in handling her complaint, which took from 1 October 2021 to 11 May 2022 to be taken up. The university apologised that she had not felt heard.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 4 sources · Added 28/10/2026
30 Apr 2024BraziliFood facial recognition check
A delivery worker in Brazil's Federal District who had worked for the iFood app for about three years says he was banned from the platform in April 2024 shortly after completing the app's daily facial recognition check. iFood support told him another person had tried to access his account; when he asked to see that person's photos, they were his own. G1 reports that the only difference from his registration photo was his hair, which he was growing out. In a judgment reported in June 2025, a Brasília labour judge, applying a default because iFood had not filed a defence in time, accepted as true that the contract was suspended through iFood's fault, that he suffered financial and psychological losses, and that the facial recognition tool had a racist failure, and ordered iFood to pay R$60,000 in moral damages. iFood denies that its facial recognition procedure analyses racial characteristics and has appealed. The account was restored during the case. No appeal ruling has been reported.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources · Added 27/10/2026
1 Dec 2025CzechiaUnidentified legal research tool
On 1 December 2025 the presiding judge of a chamber of the Czech Constitutional Court fined a Prague lawyer 25,000 crowns (a quarter of the statutory maximum) for grossly obstructing proceedings. The lawyer had filed a constitutional complaint, for a client refused a temporary residence permit, that argued from 12 decisions of the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights; the court found that a substantial part of them did not exist and part were grossly misinterpreted. The order says the complaint showed signs of generative AI and that the court presumed the lawyer had generated it with an AI model and then failed to verify the citations. The lawyer confirmed to INFO.CZ that an AI tool was used, described it as a paid professional model from a legal information system provider, said the output was not checked enough, and expressed regret. The court invited the client to correct the complaint so that the client would suffer no procedural harm; the complaint was later rejected as manifestly unfounded on 30 January 2026. INFO.CZ reported on 10 December 2025 that the lawyer had apologised and paid the fine and that the Czech Bar Association's supervisory board was examining the case.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 5 sources · Added 26/10/2026
19 Aug 2025IndiaUnidentified AI tool
On 19 August 2025 a trial court in Andhra Pradesh hearing a suit for an injunction over a property dismissed the defendants' objections to an advocate-commissioner's report on the property, relying on four purported Supreme Court judgments that, according to the defendants and later the courts, do not exist. The defendants challenged the order in the Andhra Pradesh High Court, which, as the Supreme Court recorded, realised the judgments were AI-generated, recorded a word of caution, and on 21 January 2026 dismissed their petition on the merits. On appeal, the Supreme Court said in an order of 27 February 2026 that it took cognisance of the trial court deploying AI-generated non-existing, fake or synthetic alleged judgments, that a decision based on such judgments is not an error in decision making but misconduct, and directed that the trial court not proceed on the basis of the advocate-commissioner's report while the appeal is pending. In May 2026 the Supreme Court asked the Bar Council of India to set up an expert panel on AI-generated fake judgments. The AI tool is not named, the sources read do not name the judge, and no outcome of the appeal had been reported in the sources read.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 25/10/2026
May 2024ItalyUnidentified speech-to-text tool
In May 2024 a businessman questioned as a suspect in the Genoa prosecutors' inquiry into alleged bribes to the president of the Liguria region was recorded in the official transcript of his interrogation before the preliminary-investigations judge as saying that the president wanted 'finanziamenti illeciti' (unlawful financing). According to Corriere della Sera, on receiving the transcript he wrote to the judge to contest it, saying he had said 'finanziamenti leciti' (lawful financing); his lawyer said the legally valid handwritten record did not contain the word. Il Post reports that the passage had been highlighted in the headlines of many newspapers in the following days as confirming the prosecutors' accusations, and that a second hearing of the audio was needed to settle it. La Repubblica reported on 27 May 2024 that, at an ad hoc hearing, the businessman confirmed he had said 'leciti', with the prosecutor's agreement according to his lawyer, and the judge took note; it wrote that the fault appears to lie with the automatic software that transcribes words spoken in court. Il Post reports that checks found the error was not human and that the transcript had been produced by speech-to-text software. The software is not named.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Internal Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources · Added 25/10/2026
13 Apr 2024BrazilUnidentified facial recognition system
During the half-time interval of the Sergipe state football championship final at the Batistão stadium in Aracaju on 13 April 2024, military police took a personal trainer from the stands to a police room after the stadium's facial recognition system flagged him as a man with an open arrest warrant; he was searched and questioned and released once police confirmed he was not the person sought (G1, his lawyer and the military police). Sergipe's governor publicly regretted 'the failure of the facial recognition tool' and suspended its use until a new protocol was adopted. In June 2024 the man sued the state for 550,000 reais in moral damages; the state argued that the Aracaju municipality, not the state, had contracted the system. In December 2025 the judge rejected that preliminary objection, according to Mangue Jornalismo, which read the court file. No final judgment is reported.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Lawsuit Ongoing
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 24/10/2026
7 Jun 2024NetherlandsChatGPT
A homeowner in the Netherlands sued his neighbour, whose permitted roof extension shaded his solar panels, claiming more than 21,000 euros for lost yield and investment. In a judgment of 7 June 2024 (ECLI:NL:RBGEL:2024:3636), the sub-district judge of the Rechtbank Gelderland, sitting in Nijmegen, held that the neighbour had to bear half of the damage and then calculated the damage, estimating the average lifespan of solar panels from 2009 and the current average electricity price partly with the help of ChatGPT, as the judgment states. Using a lifespan of 27.5 years, about 15 remaining years and a price of 0.30 euros per kWh, the judge put the yield loss at about 2,250 euros and the maximum damage at 3,323.40 euros; half of that was less than the 3,300 euros the neighbour had offered, so the claim was rejected and the homeowner, who had refused the offer, received nothing and was ordered to pay costs. On the neighbour's counterclaim, the judge assumed, again partly with ChatGPT, that insulation material the homeowner had thrown into water was no longer usable, and ordered him to pay damages of 2,619.02 euros in total. The judgment does not say what was asked or answered, and whether it was appealed is not reported.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownUkraineChatGPT (reported)
The Appeals Chamber of Ukraine's High Anti-Corruption Court left without consideration an appeal that the applicant had drafted with the ChatGPT chatbot, treating the approach as a sign of disrespect for the judicial system, UkraNews reported on 15 June 2025 from a ruling in the court-decision register. According to the report, the applicant wrote in the appeal that she had turned to AI after her lawyers declined to prepare it, and the court said the text contained sarcastic and offensive wording about the courts and that using ChatGPT-generated material without proper legal grounds contradicted the principles of judicial proceedings. The appeal concerned an investigating judge's refusal of her complaint about inaction by anti-corruption investigators and prosecutors. The ruling could be challenged in cassation within three months; no later outcome was found.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Lawsuit Dismissed
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 23/10/2026
2020Event location unknownHireVue
City AM and Cosmetics Business reported in March 2022, relaying the BBC Three documentary Computer Says No and the Times, that three make-up artists at MAC, an Estée Lauder Companies brand, lost their jobs in a 2020 redundancy process after being told to reapply for their roles through a video interview run by HireVue and marked by an algorithm. City AM reports that they were made redundant partly as a result of the automated judgement. The women said no one could explain how they had been scored, and one said nobody watched the video. Estée Lauder settled their claims out of court; the amount was not disclosed. The company says staff were told in advance about the HireVue skills assessment, that the process was used in tandem with human decision-making, that facial recognition made up about 0.25% of the overall assessment and performance data and qualitative feedback most of it, and that any suggestion facial recognition played a decisive role is false. HireVue said its video-analysis component had been discontinued about two years earlier. How much the HireVue score weighed in each decision is not reported.
Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution disputed · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 22/10/2026
Jun 2026Event location unknownUnidentified AI jury tool
In two public posts to r/offmychest, on 6 June and 9 October 2026, a person writes that after a recurring argument about chores their fiancé told them he had used an online AI jury to decide which of them was right, that the 'jury' said he was right, and that he then refused to discuss the argument, saying the AI had told him he was right and the poster was being unreasonable. The poster says they left to stay with a relative on the morning of the first post. In the October update they write that the relationship is over, that they cancelled a wedding planned for late November and tried to recover what money they could, and that they ended things because their ex-fiancé would not discuss the dispute and 'kept on harping about the AI saying he was right'. The posts do not say that the poster saw the AI output; what it said is known only through the fiancé's account as relayed by the poster. The tool is not named. The poster also describes a longer-running disagreement over housework that predates the AI use. The account is uncorroborated.
Contextual tracker case Low reported severity
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 17/10/2026
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