AIA-2026-0020Courts and legalUnder review

Employment Relations Authority increased costs after a party kept citing non-existent cases (O’Driscoll v Rehab Co)

The Employment Relations Authority awarded increased costs against a self-represented party, partly because they relied on cases that did not exist and kept doing so after being pointed to the courts’ generative AI guidelines.

Severity 2 of 5: Moderate. Increased costs were awarded against the party. How we rate severity
Date it happened
1 March 2026
Added to the register
1 March 2026
Type of AI involved
Generative AI (legal research)
Kind of harm
Misleading information; costs
Last updated
29 October 2026

What happened

In O’Driscoll v Rehab Co Mobile Ltd [2026] NZERA 106, the Employment Relations Authority awarded increased costs against a self-represented party. One reason was that the party relied on cases that did not exist or could not be found, and continued to cite non-existent cases in final submissions even after the courts’ generative AI guidelines had been drawn to their attention.

Sources

  1. Supreme Court issues warning on AI use: what the decision means for AI in litigation proceedings
    MinterEllisonRuddWatts, 2026
  2. O'Driscoll v Rehab Co Mobile Ltd [2026] NZERA 106
    Employment Relations Authority, 2026

Change history

  • 30 Oct 2026 Added to the register.

Cite this entry

AI Incidents Aotearoa. (2026). Employment Relations Authority increased costs after a party kept citing non-existent cases (O’Driscoll v Rehab Co) (AIA-2026-0020). AI Safety Aotearoa. Retrieved 29 October 2026, from https://aiincidents.nz/register/employment-relations-authority-increased-costs-after-a-party-kept-citing-non-existent-cases-odriscoll-v-rehab-co/

Other formats

Spot a mistake?

Tell us and we’ll check it. Every change is logged.

Suggest a correction

Has this happened to you?

AI Safety Aotearoa has plain-language guides on what to do.

Read the guides