09/29/2026
BE CAREFUL WHO YOU HIRE FOR YOUR LEGAL & IMMIGRATION MATTERS
Incompetent or careless legal representation can cost you far more than legal fees. It can put your entire case at risk.
A recent Federal Court decision, Ahmed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1202, provides an important warning about the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in legal work.
The case involved applicants seeking judicial review of a Refugee Protection Division decision. Their court record was filed late because of an alleged administrative error at their lawyers’ office. But the Federal Court found that the much more serious problem was the content of the legal arguments themselves.
WHAT DID THE COURT FIND?
Justice Lafrenière identified several serious problems:
Cases cited in the legal memorandum could not be found at the citations provided.
The Court identified five purported authorities that could not be located as cited. The Judge stated that the numerous incorrect references suggested that AI tools had been used to draft the list of authorities.
Existing cases were cited for legal propositions they did not actually support. The Court examined those authorities and found that they did not say what the memorandum claimed they said. One citation even referred to paragraphs that did not exist in the judgment.
The Court described citing fake cases in court documents as an “abuse of process” and said it was tantamount to making a false statement to the Court. The Judge also emphasized that misleading legal arguments violate professional ethics and counsel’s fundamental duty of candour.
Perhaps most importantly, the applicants had an opportunity to file reply submissions explaining how the fictitious citations and inaccurate authorities ended up in their materials but they did not do so.
The Judge therefore concluded that AI had been used in drafting the memorandum “without careful human judgment being applied to the output.”
THE COURT'S WARNING ABOUT AI
The Court recognized that AI can improve efficiency, but warned that its indiscriminate use in legal drafting threatens the integrity of the judicial process.
Justice Lafrenière explained that fabricated citations can distort the law, while AI's polished language can create an illusion of competence and genuine legal reasoning that hides serious inaccuracies. Inaccurate AI-generated arguments also waste the resources of the Court and opposing parties.
The consequences in this case were significant:
The application for leave and judicial review was dismissed.
The Court noted that the applicants had potentially exposed themselves to sanctions, including substantial costs, for attempting to file what the Court considered an abusive document. No costs were ultimately ordered because the Respondent did not request them.
THE LESSON FOR CLIENTS
Technology can assist legal professionals—but it cannot replace **competence, professional judgment, legal research and verification**.
Whether you are hiring a lawyer or a regulated immigration consultant, do your due diligence.
Your representative should understand your case, conduct proper legal research, verify every authority relied upon, and personally take responsibility for the documents submitted on your behalf.
AI is a tool.
It should never become a substitute for professional competence. When your immigration status, refugee claim, appeal or judicial review is at stake, careless legal work can have consequences that extend far beyond the legal bill.
Choose your legal representative carefully. Ask questions. Verify credentials. And remember: a professional title alone does not guarantee competent representation.
*Case: Ahmed v. Canada (Citizenship and Immigration), 2026 FC 1202, Federal Court, September 28, 2026.*
