We have compiled this database through systematic and manual searches of reported decisions published by the Canadian Legal Information Institute (CanLII). We run weekly searches across all Canadian courts and tribunals using two categories of search terms.

The first category targets judicial language indicating that a cited authority could not be verified. These searches use proximity operators to identify decisions where terms such as “cannot find,” “unable to locate,” or “unable to find” appear near words like “case,” “citation,” “authority,” or “decision.” These keywords capture decisions where an adjudicator has noted that a cited case does not appear to exist, regardless of whether the adjudicator attributed the issue to artificial intelligence.

The second category targets decisions that explicitly discuss the use of artificial intelligence in legal proceedings, using terms such as “artificial intelligence,” “generative AI,” and “gen-ai.”

The decisions responsive to the search terms are reviewed individually to confirm the presence of fictitious citations. Relevant data that make their way onto the database are extracted directly from the decision itself. A PDF of the decision is next to each entry for transparency and public verification.

We have designed this methodology to be comprehensive within reported decisions published on CanLII. Any case in which a Canadian court or tribunal identified a fictitious citation using language captured by our search terms will surface in our results and be published in our database. We record each decision as a separate entry. Where the same parties appear in multiple proceedings, we count each decision independently because each one reflects a distinct judicial finding.

This database does not represent an exhaustive record of all fictitious citations in Canadian legal proceedings. Our research does not extend to decisions before January 1, 2024. Lastly, this database documents judicial findings. We do not take a position on how or why any citation came to be included in a filing, nor do we draw any inference about the individuals involved beyond what is expressly stated in the decision itself.

If you cite this database in academic research, court filings, or news articles, three citation formats are provided below. Click “Copy” next to any format to copy it to your clipboard.

@misc{zheng2026hallucinated,
  author    = {Zheng, Tom Macintosh},
  title     = {{AI Hallucinated Cases in Canadian Courts: Database of Fictitious Citations}},
  year      = {2026},
  publisher = {Courtready},
  address   = {Toronto},
  url       = {https://courtready.ca/fictitious-citations-in-canadian-courts/},
  note      = {Accessed: }
}

If you cite this database in a court filing, law review article, news story, or research paper, we’d love to hear about it. Email tom [at] courtready.ca.