Skip to content

Regulation Tracker / Other

Tribunale di Siracusa, Sez. II civ., judgment no. 338/2026 (AI-hallucinated citations, Art. 96 c.p.c.)

Court of Siracusa (Tribunale di Siracusa) · Sicily

last revised 2026-02-20last verified 2026-09-041 versioncountry page →

Judgment (guidance)In forceVerification duty

map categories:Duty to verify AI outputSanctions for AI misuse

Unverified: we have not yet opened the official document at the linked address. The record is listed for completeness and excluded from search indexes until confirmed.

In a contract dispute counsel cited four Cassazione decisions whose numbers or content did not exist, apparently generated by AI without checking the CED database. The court held that uncritical use of generative AI is gross negligence rather than a mitigating factor and applied Article 96(3)-(4) c.p.c., ordering EUR 30,200 in fees, damages and a court-fund payment.

Applies to
lawyers, parties
Effective
See version history
Current version
Judgment 20 February 2026 · 20 Feb 2026
Last verified
04 Sept 2026
Official text
ntplusdiritto.ilsole24ore.com/art/quattro-sentenze-fantasma-e-conto-30…

What the document requires

  • Unverified generative-AI output in a filing is gross negligence under Art. 96(3) c.p.c.
  • Damages for reckless litigation plus a payment to the Cassa delle ammende under Art. 96(4).
  • Contrasts with Trib. Firenze (14 March 2025), which refused Art. 96 sanctions absent bad faith.

Version history

VersionDateWhat changedSource
Judgment 20 February 2026current2026-02-20Reported by Il Sole 24 Ore NT+ Diritto; official text not obtained.official

Sources

Cite this record

SafeLegalAI Legal AI Regulation Tracker, "Tribunale di Siracusa, Sez. II civ., judgment no. 338/2026 (AI-hallucinated citations, Art. 96 c.p.c.)" (Court of Siracusa (Tribunale di Siracusa), Judgment 20 February 2026, 2026-02-20), safelegalai.com/regulation/other/it-tribunale-siracusa-338-2026-ai-hallucinations (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.

More official documents in Other