The Ontario Superior Court’s twin decisions in Ko v Li—2025 ONSC 2766 and 2025 ONSC 2965 —sound a warning bell to every practitioner looking to incorporate artificial intelligence into their toolset. These decisions don’t just critique misuse of AI: they affirm lawyers’ enduring duties to accuracy, professionalism, and candour before the court.
In a family/estates motion, a seasoned family lawyer filed a factum citing several reported cases—only for the judge to discover some linked to irrelevant matters, some that didn’t exist, and at least one that actually contradicted the argument being made. When the lawyer relied on those authorities in oral argument and couldn’t produce valid copies, Justice Myers described the situation as “a serious issue”—and ordered a show-cause hearing on potential contempt. A rare circumstance, but necessary.
At the follow-up scheduling conference, the lawyer admitted her factum was drafted using ChatGPT, which had hallucinated those fake case citations. She apologized, revised the factum, and requested the court to dispense with the contempt hearing.
Justice Myers concluded these steps—coupled with her transparency and assurances—satisfied the court’s concerns. He formally dismissed the show-cause order on consent, noting she would undertake CPD in legal ethics and AI competency and would not charge her client for the deficient material.
The take aways for lawyers of all stripes is that artificial intelligence, if not properly used, will lead to disastrous outcomes.
At The Ross Firm, we embrace innovation—but within a framework of diligence, integrity and professional oversight. We stand for:
- Rigorous review protocols for any AI-supported research or drafting;
- Enhanced file supervision, ensuring senior counsel oversee all AI-sourced work; and
- Appropriate use, to save the client time, money and improve efficiency.
Our expert family team at The Ross Firm can assist you with your family law issues. Contact [email protected] to set up your consultation.
Disclaimer: the above blog post is legal information and does not constitute legal advice. We strongly recommend obtaining independent legal advice with respect to any legal issues.
