A plaintiff in the Cayman courts escaped contempt proceedings after it was found cases he had used to back his claim were fakes generated by artificial intelligence.
The Court of Appeal’s civil division warned that use of bogus cases could also lead to criminal investigation as well as extra costs, or the case being stayed or struck out altogether.
Appeals court Justice Clare Montgomery KC, one of a three-strong panel, said that two cases quoted by Samuel Johnson, who is representing himself in legal action against the Cayman Islands Health Services Authority, could not be traced or authenticated.
Montgomery said a judge in a 2023 case in London had ruled that lawyers had a “professional duty” to check the accuracy of material generated by services such as ChatGPT against authoritative sources.
She added in a written ruling, “In our judgment, these duties apply with little modification to self-representing litigants.
“Litigants-in-person, even those less experienced than Mr. Johnson, have a duty not to mislead the courts. This duty includes a duty not to mislead by citing fabricated authorities.”
Montgomery said that Johnson had breached his duty to the court, made worse because he had at first said the references were “inserted with assistance as [he does] not have access to a proper legal database”.
She added that it was not until just before the hearing started earlier this month that he admitted he had used AI to generate his skeleton argument.
Montgomery said Johnson’s “frank, if belated” admission that he used AI and that some of the cases cited might not exist meant that the court did “not consider it necessary to take any action against him”.
But, she added, “This judgment must though act as a warning of the risks of using artificial intelligence for legal research and the potential consequences if a person puts fabricated citations before the court.”
Montgomery said, “For the future, it must be made clear that all statements, submissions, skeletons or other documents from parties to court proceedings which use generative AI and that are to be submitted to the courts must identify the use of AI and the party concerned must take personal responsibility for checking that none of the references are fabricated.”
One of the bogus cases was said to be from Jamaica in 1999 and the other was claimed to have been heard in the Cayman Islands Court of Appeal in 2012.
But the court was unable to trace either case and Johnson could not provide copies when asked.
Montgomery’s written judgment was backed by the other two appeal judges, Sir John Goldring, the president, and Justice Sir Michael Birt.
The ruling came after Johnson, who gave an address for service of documents in Greater Georgetown, Guyana, for the case against the Health Services Authority, argued that a Cayman Grand Court rule that insisted on a Caymanian address for court proceedings was unfair and that he did not have to provide one.
But Grand Court Justice Jalil Asif KC stayed the proceedings and refused to lift the stay after further arguments, so Johnson took the matter to the Court of Appeal.
The appeals court said it had not been persuaded the need for a Caymanian address was “disproportionate, or that it is unfair or that it will effectively deny Mr Johnson access to justice”.
Related Videos
