Charlotin AI Hallucination Cases Database

The figures on this page are drawn from the AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, a researcher at Sciences Po, Paris. The database is publicly available, licensed under CC BY 4.0 with attribution, and its inclusion bar is strict: only decisions where a court or tribunal explicitly found or clearly implied reliance on hallucinated material. Ecsper reviews and verifies the count quarterly against the live database. The number shown is rounded down to remain accurate between updates. Individual case details are verified against primary sources and reputable legal publications. This tracker counts documented outcomes. Cases where fabricated content was filed but not caught are, by definition, invisible. Whatever the true number is, this is the floor. The full dataset is available as a CSV download from the source database. Ecsper downloads, trims, and analyses the dataset monthly. The case explorer shows the trimmed dataset; for the complete record including hallucination item details and source documents, visit the original database.

Thomson Reuters Institute, 2026

Contextual statistics on AI adoption and governance gaps are drawn from the Thomson Reuters Institute Future of Professionals Report 2026, based on a survey of 1,816 professionals across 62 countries. These figures appear in the Overview dashboard. They are cited individually where they appear and are not drawn from the Charlotin database.

Secretariat and ACEDS, 2026

Expert witness AI adoption and controls data are drawn from the Secretariat and ACEDS 2026 Artificial Intelligence Report, a survey of legal professionals conducted in March 2026 across law firms, corporations, government agencies, service providers, and independent consultancies. This is the first year the survey included a dedicated section on AI use with expert witnesses.

Stanford RegLab, 2024

Error rates for commercial legal AI tools are drawn from a peer-reviewed Stanford RegLab study, which found hallucination rates of 17% to 34% even in paid platforms including Westlaw AI-Assisted Research and Lexis+ AI. This finding is cited in the growth trajectory section.