Artificial intelligence is already changing how legal work gets done. Faster research. Cleaner drafts. Better access to information.
But there is a problem emerging in Canadian courts that is not theoretical anymore. It is real, measurable, and growing quickly.
And if you are involved in a family law case, it should concern you.
The Rise of “Fake Law” in Canadian Courts
A recent study by Courtready has confirmed what many judges and lawyers have been quietly noticing. Since 2024, Canadian courts have identified more than 234 fictitious legal citations submitted as if they were real cases.
These are not minor errors. These are entirely made-up cases generated by artificial intelligence tools and then relied on in court materials.
The scale is what makes this different.
Over 127 court decisions have already been affected across 42 different courts and tribunals nationwide.
Even more concerning is how fast this is accelerating. What started as a handful of cases in 2024 has turned into dozens in 2025, with the trend continuing into 2026.
This is not slowing down. It is speeding up.
Who Is Most at Risk
The data tells a blunt story.
In 81 percent of the cases where fictitious citations were identified, the person submitting them was self-represented.
That matters in family law more than anywhere else.
Family court already sees a high number of self-represented litigants. Add AI tools into the mix, and you now have people relying on what looks like authoritative legal research that simply does not exist.
The result is predictable. Time is wasted. Costs increase. Credibility is damaged. And in some cases, arguments collapse entirely.
The Bigger Risk: What Courts Are Not Catching
The numbers you see are not the full picture.
They represent only what judges have identified and commented on in written decisions.
That means the real number is almost certainly higher.
There are likely fictitious cases being cited right now that have not yet been caught.
That is where this shifts from a curiosity to a systemic risk.
Because once false authorities slip through, they can influence outcomes, negotiations, and even future arguments.
How Fake Citations Are Slipping Through
AI tools are designed to generate convincing language. When they do not know an answer, they sometimes fill the gap by fabricating one.
In legal research, that often means inventing cases that look completely legitimate.
Some of the common patterns being flagged by courts include:
- A missing or incomplete neutral citation, which is a basic requirement for any real Canadian decision
- Unusual or overly clean numbering patterns that do not match how courts assign case identifiers
- Generic party names that read like placeholders rather than real litigants
These are not subtle issues once you know what to look for, but they are easy to miss if you assume the source is reliable.
Signs a Legal Submission May Be AI Generated
Courts and practitioners are also starting to recognize when submissions themselves may be drafted using AI tools.
There are recurring indicators:
- Use of American legal terminology in a Canadian proceeding
- No pinpoint references to specific paragraphs in cited cases
- A sudden jump in quality or tone compared to earlier filings
- Repetitive and formulaic transitions throughout the document
None of these prove AI use on their own. But together, they raise real questions about whether the person submitting the material has read or verified the law they are relying on.
Why This Matters in Family Law
Family law cases are often fact driven and discretionary. Judges rely heavily on credibility, clarity, and properly supported legal arguments.
If your materials include fake authorities, even unintentionally, the damage goes beyond the specific citation:
- You risk losing the court’s confidence.
- You increase the likelihood of costs being awarded against you.
- You weaken your overall position, even on issues where you may have been right.
This is not just a technical mistake. It can directly affect outcomes.
What This Means for Lawyers and Clients
There is nothing wrong with using AI as a tool. The issue is blind reliance.
Every case cited must be verified. Every authority must be checked. Every argument must be grounded in real law.
That is the baseline.
For clients, especially those considering handling parts of their case themselves, the message is simple.
Do not assume that something that looks professional is accurate.
Because right now, in Canadian courts, we know that is not always true.
The Bottom Line
This is not a future problem. It is already here.
Courts across Canada are dealing with fabricated legal authorities at a scale that did not exist even two years ago.
And the trend line is clear: if you are involved in a legal dispute, particularly in family law, accuracy is everything. The law you rely on must be real. Verified. Defensible.
Anything less is a risk you cannot afford.
If you want to stay ahead of where family law is going, including how technology is reshaping litigation, follow our latest insights at FamilyLLB.com and our ongoing webinar series.
