Civil Litigation Brief ®
Menu
  • Home
  • About
  • Membership Plans
  • Webinars
  • Login
Updates and Commentary on Civil Procedure, by Gordon Exall, Barrister, Kings Chambers
Browse: Home » 2025 » November » 20
AND THEY KEEP ON COMING... ANOTHER FALSE CITATIONS CASE: "I RELIED ON THE AI OVERVIEW" FROM GOOGLE

AND THEY KEEP ON COMING… ANOTHER FALSE CITATIONS CASE: “I RELIED ON THE AI OVERVIEW” FROM GOOGLE

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Conduct, Members Content, Witness statements

The cases continue to come.  Some lawyers are continuing to rely upon artificial intelligence to produce false authorities.   Here was a firm of solicitors (defending themselves) who relied on the AI contents of a Google search.  Such searches are never…

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT:  THE COURT USES A "CARROT AND STICK" APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

THE CURRENT IMPORTANCE OF PLEADINGS 38: PARTICULARS OF CLAIM IN A £3,000,000 CLAIM STRUCK OUT: THE COURT USES A “CARROT AND STICK” APPROACH TO DEFECTIVE PLEADINGS

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Statements of Case, Striking out

In this case the judge decided that the claimant’s pleaded case was so defective that the entire Particulars of Claim needed to be struck out.  It is a working example of how pleadings need to be compliant and cannot be…

ANOTHER FALSE  AND "HALLUCINATED" CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

ANOTHER FALSE AND “HALLUCINATED” CITATION CASE: A SOLICITOR IS ACCOUNTABLE FOR WORK DONE BY THEIR STAFF: WASTED COSTS ORDER MADE

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Abuse of Process, Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil evidence, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Wasted Costs

We have yet another case of “hallucinated” cases caused by artificial “intelligence” being cited in court.  These have the capacity to, and indeed do, land lawyers in very hot water.  Here false cases were put before the court in an…

SERVICE POINTS 23: THE COURT REFUSES TO RATIFY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL: "THE RESULTS ARE HARSH BUT THAT IS A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE REGIME..."

SERVICE POINTS 23: THE COURT REFUSES TO RATIFY SERVICE OF THE CLAIM FORM BY EMAIL: “THE RESULTS ARE HARSH BUT THAT IS A NECESSARY CONSEQUENCE OF THE REGIME…”

November 20, 2025 · by gexall · in Applications, Avoiding negligence claims, Civil Procedure, Members Content, Service of the claim form, Serving documents

We could, perhaps, run some kind of charity betting game on whether, and how many, cases there will be on service of the claim form between now and Christmas. The reason for not doing so it because it runs the…

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email. Subscription notifies you of a new post, it does not give you access to members' content.

Join 12.3K other subscribers

Recent Posts

  • COURT REFUSES DEFENDANTS’ APPLICATIONS TO AMEND AND TO RESILE FROM ADMISSIONS: A SUBMISSION THAT “WELL WE WERE LYING WHEN WE SIGNED THOSE STATEMENTS OF TRUTH” IS NOT A GOOD STARTING PLACE
  • ADVISING THE CLIENT OF THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: TEN USEFUL CHECKLIST COUPLED WITH THE RELEVANT LINKS
  • PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE NEWS 5 : WHY A SOLICITOR CAN BE NEGLIGENT, A CLAIMANT HONEST AND YET BE WHOLLY UNSUCCESSFUL IN A PROFESSIONAL NEGLIGENCE ACTION
  • WITNESS EVIDENCE WEDNESDAY: THOSE WHO DRAFTED THE WITNESS STATEMENTS “HAVE FORGOTTEN WHAT THE ROLE OF THE WITNESS STATEMENT IS”: A USEFUL CHECKLIST AND LINKS TO KEEP YOU ON THE STRAIGHT AND NARROW
  • SERVICE POINTS 54: THE CLAIMANT FAILED TO SERVE A SEALED CLAIM FORM IN TIME: THERE WAS NO OBLIGATION ON A DEFENDANT TO MAKE AN APPLICATION UNDER CPR 7.7: THE ACTION BITES THE DUST

Top Posts

COST BITES 449 : YOUR CASE AGAINST ME WAS DISMISSED BECAUSE YOU HAD NO PROPER CAUSE OF ACTION: SHOULD I GET 100% OF MY COSTS ON THE INDEMNITY BASIS? (LIFE IS MORE NUANCED THAN THIS...)
EXPERT WATCH 71: "I DO NOT ATTACH WEIGHT TO THIS REPORT AS EXPERT EVIDENCE": THE EXPERT WAS "ADVOCATING" AND "HE TRESPASSES INTO THE ROLE RESERVED TO THE TRIBUNAL"
THE IMPORTANCE OF MAKING AN APPLICATION TO EXTEND TIME BEFORE THE DATE OF COMPLIANCE: THE COURT DOES NOT CONSIDER DENTON PRINCIPLES EVEN IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO MEET THEIR OWN PROPOSED TIMETABLE
THROWBACK FRIDAY: ADVISING CLIENTS AS TO THE RISKS OF LITIGATION: “CLIENTS WANT TWO INCONSISTENT THINGS”: CASES AND GUIDANCE (SEPTEMBER 2018)
BACK TO BASICS MONDAY: THE RIGHT TO REPLY: WHEN MUST YOU DO IT AND WHEN SHOULD YOU DO IT? THE CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF A DEFENCE TO COUNTERCLAIM

Archives

Blogroll

  • Fatal Accident Law
  • Legal Futures
  • Personal injury: Liability and Damages

Books

  • Munkman & Exall on Damages for Personal Injuries and Death 15th ed
  • The APIL Guide to Fatal Accidents 4th edition

Useful Links

  • Buntools (for preparing PDF Bundles)
  • Kings Chambers
  • Kings Chambers Costs & Litigation Funding
  • Kings Chambers Serious Injury
  • The Civil Procedure Rules
  • The Law Society Gazette
  • The National Archives Recently Published Judgments
  • The Senior Court Costs Office Guide 2025
  • www.Bailii.org

Copyright

© Gordon Exall, Exall Legal Training, Civil Litigation Brief, 2013-2026. Unauthorised use and or duplication of the material contained on this blog without permission is strictly prohibited.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.

To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Membership Terms and Conditions
  • Privacy Policy
  • Advertising Policy
  • Copyright
  • Legal Disclaimer

Copyright © 2026 Civil Litigation Brief ®

Powered by Big Yellow Workshop

Loading Comments...

You must be logged in to post a comment.