Event date unknownChinaUnidentified video tool
Police in Nanchong, Sichuan, said on 29 October 2026 that their investigation found a man had secretly filmed or stolen image material of several female colleagues, commissioned other people to make AI face-swap obscene videos from it, and spread the videos for profit through social platforms in and outside China and a QQ group he ran, charging entry fees and selling goods. According to the police, a female colleague or colleagues (the account does not say how many) discovered what had happened and called the police; he was traced, caught and placed in administrative detention, and the case remains under investigation. The police did not say how they established that the videos were AI-made, how many colleagues were depicted or when the conduct took place.
Core concern High reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 31/10/2026
16 Sept 2026UkraineUnidentified image tool
A district court in Ukraine's Poltava region fined the mother of a school pupil on 22 October 2026 after finding she had failed in her duty to bring up her son, who, according to the case materials as reported, used a neural network on 16 September 2026 to generate fake nude photos of his teacher from her image without her consent and sent one to a classmate. The mother admitted the offence and confirmed her son had made such images, saying he sent only one to a classmate and that she did not know how the photos spread further. The court imposed an administrative fine of 850 hryvnias plus court fees. The report does not name the AI tool, and no statement from the teacher is reported.
Core concern Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 30/10/2026
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
May 2023United StatesChatGPT
A Colorado lawyer who had recently moved into civil litigation used ChatGPT in April and May 2023 to find case law for a client's motion to set aside a judgment and cited three Colorado Court of Appeals decisions that did not exist, without reading or checking them. On the morning of the 5 May hearing he realised the cases were fabricated but did not tell the court or withdraw the motion, and when the judge raised concerns he falsely blamed a legal intern; six days later he filed an affidavit saying he had used ChatGPT. The judge denied the motion, said the denial did not rest on the invented cases, and ordered him to show cause why he should not be sanctioned and reported to attorney regulators. On 22 November 2023 Colorado's Presiding Disciplinary Judge approved a stipulation suspending him for one year and one day, with 90 days served and the rest stayed on two years' probation, for violating rules on competence, diligence, candour to the tribunal and honesty.
Core concern Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 26/10/2026
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
Event date unknownTürkiyeUnidentified AI research tool
Kısa Dalga reported on 17 June 2026 that a lawyer in Ankara faced investigations by the prosecutor's office and the Ankara Bar after a petition the lawyer signed in a civil case at a court in the Kızılcahamam district cited Court of Cassation (Yargıtay) decisions with wrong case and decision numbers. According to the lawyer, three lawyers prepared the petition and used AI only to support it with case law; the AI tool inserted existing Court of Cassation decisions but wrote their reference numbers wrongly. Opposing counsel raised the citations at the hearing, and the same day the court wrote to the bar and the prosecutor; the lawyer says the court stated the decisions could not be found as cited in the national judicial system (UYAP) and that the numbers gave the impression of having been written at random. The lawyer says the prosecutor did not specify the alleged offence, that the error was unintentional, and that the lawyer became a joke among colleagues. A lawyers' rights group called the investigations pressure on the defence. The AI tool is not named, the hearing date is not given and no outcome of either investigation has been reported.
Core concern Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 24/10/2026
Event date unknownRussiaUnidentified legal research tool
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.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 23/10/2026
26 Jun 2025 to 27 Jun 2025VietnamStudyX and Gemini
Hanoi police said on 1 July 2025 that they had opened a criminal case for unintentionally disclosing state secrets after two candidates in Vietnam's national high school graduation exam on 26 and 27 June 2025 smuggled phones into exam rooms, photographed exam papers and used AI apps to solve them. According to the police account reported by Thanh Nien and VnExpress, one candidate uploaded part of the maths paper to the StudyX app but copied only two answers, and did the same in the chemistry and physics papers; the other photographed the maths, history and English papers and used Gemini, was caught by the exam board and was suspended from the exam. A photo of part of the maths paper had appeared on an AI maths-solving app before the exam ended, worrying candidates and parents about exam security. Police said students who did this would be disqualified, have their results annulled and could face administrative or criminal action. Neither candidate is named.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 23/10/2026
26 Jun 2025VietnamChatGPT
On 26 June 2025, during the literature paper of Vietnam's national high school graduation exam in Lam Dong province, an invigilator caught an 18-year-old candidate using a hidden button camera and wireless earpiece and suspended him from the exam. According to the provincial police account reported by Bao Lam Dong and VnExpress, he had streamed the paper to a 17-year-old friend at an internet cafe, who photographed part of it, used the ChatGPT app to solve it and read the answers to him over a Messenger call. On 27 June 2025 the Lam Dong police security investigation agency opened a criminal case for intentionally disclosing and appropriating state secrets, because unreleased graduation exam papers are classified; police said initially that only the two young people were involved and that they had found no further sharing of the paper. Neither is named.
Core concern Medium reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 23/10/2026
15 Nov 2022 to 27 May 2023Event location unknownUnidentified video tool
On 26 September 2025 the Federal Court of Australia ordered a man to pay civil penalties of A$343,500 plus costs, in what the eSafety Commissioner said was the first proceeding to impose a civil penalty under the Online Safety Act 2021. On facts he admitted, he posted 12 non-consensual deepfake intimate images of six women ordinarily resident in Australia to a deepfake website between November 2022 and May 2023. He made each one by uploading a photo of the woman found online to a webpage that created semi-naked or naked images and saving the generated image. He refused eSafety's removal notice, so two images stayed online for almost a year, and he admitted posting some later images in retaliation against people involved in issuing the notice. Each woman complained to eSafety, and the court found the posts were likely to have caused them hurt and distress. The eSafety Commissioner called this kind of deepfake abuse a misuse of easily accessible AI tools.
Core concern High reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 5 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
Event date unknownIsraelUnidentified image tool
Israel Police said in February 2025 that three boys aged 13 to 15 from Jerusalem were suspected of taking photos of girls from social media, editing them with artificial intelligence software into nude images and distributing them without consent. According to Ynet, at least 30 girls were harmed; police said investigators identified dozens of victims and that a search of the suspects' homes found edited nude images of several girls. The head of the Jerusalem district youth investigations unit described dozens of cases of girls' privacy being violated through nude images edited with AI technology. The three were questioned over publishing a sexual image without consent, and the case was passed to prosecutors to decide on charges.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 22/10/2026
28 Sept 2023SlovakiaUnidentified voice-cloning tool
Two days before Slovakia's parliamentary election of 30 September 2023, during the pre-election moratorium, an audio file presented as a phone call between Progressive Slovakia leader Michal Šimečka and Denník N journalist Monika Tódová spread on Facebook, Telegram, TikTok and chain e-mails. In it, the two voices discuss rigging the election in the party's favour. The director of the Interior Ministry's Centre for Countering Hybrid Threats told AFP that the ministry's evaluation found several signs that the recording was created with AI synthetic-voice algorithms trained on real people's voices, and other analysts consulted by AFP said it was an AI-made fake. A former member of parliament shared it as authentic, calling Šimečka a traitor and fraudster. Šimečka called it fake. Tódová filed a criminal complaint for defamation; according to Denník N, police first dismissed it, a prosecutor ordered an investigation, and in 2024 an investigator suspended the case because no suspect could be identified.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources · Added 22/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified image tool
The Westpfalz police headquarters reported on 3 June 2026, in a release datelined Kaiserslautern, that a woman had been extorted with an AI-generated nude photo. According to the police's current findings, a man edited a picture of her with artificial intelligence; through a messaging service he demanded a mid four-figure sum and threatened to publish the photo. She went to the police on Tuesday 2 June and an investigation was opened.
Core concern Medium reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 1 source · Added 20/10/2026
Event date unknownNetherlandsUnidentified image tool
Dutch police said on 4 September 2025 that they had arrested a man in a Gelderland municipality the day before on suspicion of making sexually explicit deepfakes, which they call deepnudes, and spreading them through channels such as WhatsApp groups, and of sending women unsolicited photos of his genitals and sexual messages. According to the police, 130 victims from across the country reported to them over recent years and were regularly and repeatedly harassed; NOS reports, citing the police, that images were manipulated for some of them, that the exact number is unclear, and that the police suspect the conduct began in 2021 or 2022. The police seized digital data carriers and said the Public Prosecution Service would decide on the consequences. No tool is named.
Core concern High reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
Event date unknownEvent location unknownUnidentified video tool
Mainz police reported on 23 July 2026 that a man who had met a supposed woman on an online platform refused repeated demands to send money as gift or payment cards. He then received a video that, according to the police, was evidently created with artificial intelligence: a fake news broadcast that used a picture of his face to warn about him. The sender threatened to publish the video and to report him to the police for an alleged fraud unless he paid. The man did not pay and filed a complaint; the police say no financial loss occurred and, as far as known, the video was not published. Hit Radio FFH, citing a police spokeswoman, reports that the broadcast warned women that he was a fraudster.
Core concern Low reported severity Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 3 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 19/10/2026
21 Oct 2025 to 3 Apr 2026United StatesCoCounsel
In a published opinion of 3 April 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed the briefs a lawyer appointed under the Criminal Justice Act had filed for an indigent defendant appealing a sentencing enhancement in a drug-trafficking case. The court noticed that the principal brief's file name was 'CoCounsel Skill Results' and found three quotations that appear in no legal authority and misstatements of two precedents. The lawyer admitted that a staff member had used Westlaw's CoCounsel to create the first draft, that he repeated the process for the reply, and that the false quotations came from artificial intelligence he did not verify. The court denied him compensation for the appeal, referred the opinion for possible disciplinary proceedings and to the Kentucky Bar Association, and by separate order removed him, locked his briefs and ordered replacement counsel to file new ones, which it said further delayed resolution of the defendant's appeal. The court acknowledged his candour and his 40 years without discipline.
Core + contextual relations Medium reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 3 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 19/10/2026
Jun 2025PolandUnidentified image tool
In June 2025, according to OKO.press, a group of pupils at a primary school in central Poland took a classmate's photo from the internet, used an application that offers to "undress" people in uploaded photos to generate a nude image bearing her face, posted it on the school's Instagram profile and urged others to order more such images. Poland's Personal Data Protection Office (UODO) says the girl was under 15 and notified the police, but the police declined to open proceedings and the prosecutor's office upheld that decision, finding no prohibited act; Gazeta Prawna reports that they considered the AI-generated material not pornographic and the pupil unharmed. The UODO president appealed to the Prosecutor General, in January 2026 the authority announced that prosecutors had informed it they were taking up the case again, and in June 2026 it said its president had recently asked once more for the investigation to be resumed. The application is not named.
Core concern High reported severity Involving minors Investigation Opened
AI involvement reported · Causal attribution alleged · 5 sources, 2 underlying accounts · Added 19/10/2026
26 Mar 2026 to 19 Aug 2026AustraliaUnidentified AI drafting tool
On 19 August 2026 a Deputy President of Australia's Fair Work Commission ordered a self-represented former Aldi store worker to pay A$1,230 towards Aldi's legal costs. The decision records that his unfair dismissal application, lodged on the evening he was told of his dismissal on 26 March 2026, was obviously prepared using AI and still contained AI drafting notes, and that every email and document he filed was drafted using AI. He was notified of his dismissal three days short of the six-month minimum employment period. According to the decision, his AI-generated materials kept arguing about a different, irrelevant date (when the dismissal took effect), including after the Commission explained the correct test to him twice by email on 31 July 2026. He discontinued at the hearing on 5 August 2026. The Deputy President found that continuing after those warnings was unreasonable and said it was quite possible he had adopted AI as his quasi-legal adviser, while stating that using AI to draft submissions is not of itself unreasonable and that the responsibility was his. The decision notes that an appeal was lodged against it.
Core concern Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 2 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 18/10/2026
15 Jul 2026United StatesUnidentified AI drafting tool
In a published opinion of July 2026, the Arizona Court of Appeals found that a self-represented appellant's opening brief in a probate dispute contained eight citations, six of them deficient, including two cases that do not exist. In a written explanation and at a hearing on the false citations he acknowledged relying on generative AI to write the brief and said he did nothing to verify the citations. The court struck the inaccurate and false citations, rejected the appeal because no supportive authority remained, held that citing a hallucinated case is sanctionable whether or not it is intended, and ordered him to pay the share of the other party's attorney's fees traceable to the fake citations. Because he said he did not intend to deceive and is not legally trained, the court chose this narrow sanction over contempt or fines. It described the opinion as the first published Arizona ruling on generative AI hallucinations in filings.
Core + contextual relations Low reported severity Regulatory Action
AI involvement supported · Causal attribution established · 1 source · Added 18/10/2026