A High Court judge who found AI-generated authorities in the submissions of a litigant in person has warned any lawyer who may have secretly helped her that they could face contempt proceedings.

Mr Justice Constable referred to the case of Frederick Ayinde v The London Borough of Haringey, in which the High Court referred lawyers to their regulators over the use of fake citations.

The latest incident arose in the case of Wemimo Mercy Taiwo, who sued Homelets of Bath Limited over her treatment over five dates in 2010, when the company sought to evict her from a property in Bath. A recorder had found Taiwo had been subject to harassment and had been assaulted, the court heard.

But at the quantum trial the claimant - who sought £2 million compensation for psychiatric injury, injury to feelings and loss of earnings - was found to have been dishonest in a ‘fundamental’ way, such that her entire claim was dismissed and she was ordered to pay the defendant’s costs on the indemnity basis.

Seeking permission to appeal in the High Court, Taiwo filed a grounds of appeal and skeleton argument which included a reference to 'Irani v Duchy Farm Kennels [2020] EWCA Civ 405'. 

The court asked for a copy of the authority to be provided but none was forthcoming. 'It was, in fact, a bogus authority, no doubt falsely created by AI,' the judge said, noting it was the latest in a series of cases in which 'the presentation of false authorities to court has, unsurprisingly, been deprecated'.

The judge said the claimant's skeleton argument for a hearing on 13 March had included a reference to Chapman v Tameside Hospital NHS Foundation Trust [2018] EWCA Civ 2085, another false reference.

‘The reliance upon false citations is just as unsatisfactory when presented to the Court by a litigant in person (or Litigation Friend), although of course the sanction for having done so may not necessarily be the same as those applicable if a registered lawyer is responsible for the submission’, the judge said.

‘I make clear that where (as seems at least possible here) the citation was included in a document authored or reviewed by a lawyer, without attribution, whether for reward or pro-bono, for use by the litigant in person, that lawyer may, upon identification, be subject to a reference for misconduct or potential contempt.’