A senior crown prosecutor with the Crown Prosecution Service referenced a nonexistent legal case during high court proceedings concerning whether an 11-year-old boy should be prosecuted for allegedly assaulting his younger sister. Ravinder Dhillon, acting in the rape and serious sexual offences unit, submitted detailed reference to a case identified as CPS – R v J [2024] EWCA Crim 3529 that did not exist.
Dhillon made the decision to proceed with prosecution in April, with confirmation from the chief crown prosecutor. The error came to light in October when she acknowledged the citation was incorrect, stating she had instead meant to reference a different, actual decision from 15 years prior. According to court records, the nonexistent reference originated from an AI-generated response during an internet search conducted for legal research purposes.
Two senior high court judges characterized the error as “unsatisfactory,” while legal experts called it a “serious failure.” Brian Flanagan, an associate professor studying AI use in law, noted the incident raises fundamental concerns about professional standards and state accountability, particularly when government agencies cite fabricated legal authorities. The high court determined the erroneous citation did not ultimately affect the outcome of the boy’s challenge to the prosecution decision.
This marks the second confirmed instance involving the CPS, which previously acknowledged in February that one of its lawyers had cited nonexistent legal authorities in an extradition case, likely due to AI. The CPS stated it maintains strict policies limiting AI use and requiring human verification of accuracy. Legal trackers document approximately 101 confirmed, suspected, or disputed AI-related errors across UK courts this year, with observers suggesting the actual figure may be substantially higher given unpublished lower court decisions.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI