Singapore Court Rules on AI Hallucination: A Reality Check for Small Firms
What Happened
A Singapore lawyer cited a completely fictitious case authority in written court submissions - a case that was generated by an unnamed "generative AI tool" and simply didn't exist. When opposing counsel couldn't locate the case, the lawyer initially tried to downplay the incident as merely a "clerical error" before eventually admitting the AI origin.
The High Court Registrar wasn't buying it, finding the conduct "improper, unreasonable and negligent" and ordering the lawyer to personally pay $800 in costs to the opposing party - a meaningful financial sting that sends a clear message about personal accountability for AI-generated content in Singapore's legal system.
The link to the full judgement.
The "I Told You So" Moment (That I'm Not Taking)
As I read the judgment, the implications were clear. No, I didn't think that the lawyers "should have known better".