Biton v. National Insurance Institute

Jerusalem Regional Labor Court · Israel · 2025-10-16

OtherAcknowledged AI output tenderedexpert-reportoffered by plaintiffchallenge: expert-requiredsensitive matter — ruling only

Plaintiff’s counsel used ChatGPT to argue that pulling a heavy cart could injure the back and to draft questions for a medical expert. The court rejected fact-specific AI-derived questions but allowed underlying medical studies allegedly cited by ChatGPT to be submitted for expert response.

The court's finding, in its words

The court permitted submission of underlying studies while cautioning that ChatGPT should be used carefully.

Short verbatim extract (≤25 words) for identification; the judgment is linked below and is the record.

Decision: damiencharlotin.com
Read: 2026-09-07 · primary document read
Found via: Damien Charlotin acknowledged-AI-output lead CSV (CC0)
Notes: Hebrew PDF copy read; no official publication-ban check confirmed.

No alleged media is hosted or linked. Where the court found material genuine or fabricated, the finding is the court's; where a party merely alleged it, this page says so. Publication restrictions have not yet been checked for this row. This record summarises a public court document or official publication and reports what it says; SafeLegalAI makes no findings of its own. Individuals and organisations are named only as they appear in that public record. Anyone named may send a right of reply, correction or contextual update (for example an appeal, vacatur or later disposition) via /report; we add a dated note where appropriate. Reply or correct this record.

compiled by the Cognesio LLP editorial teammethodas of 2026-09-07v0.1.1coding CC BY 4.0JSON Hugging Face GitHub