Incident Tracker

Cork & Anor v Smith, [2026] EWHC 1199 (Ch)

referral

In the High Court (Insolvency and Companies List), Pinsent Masons LLP quoted a fabricated version of Insolvency Rule 12.37(5) — text that does not exist — after a junior solicitor used an AI system that hallucinated the provision. The firm self-referred to the Solicitors Regulation Authority and agreed to pay the clients' costs of the erroneous correspondence.

Date of decision/order

2026-05-22

Court

High Court of England and Wales (Business and Property Courts, Insolvency and Companies List)

Jurisdiction

UK

AI tool

Not identified in the record

Conduct

Pinsent Masons LLP presented, as a direct quotation in a 30 March 2026 letter to the court, fabricated text purporting to be Insolvency Rule 12.37(5) — a provision that does not exist. A junior associate solicitor had used an AI system that hallucinated the rule; a second letter compounded the error.

Consequence

See outcome

Regulatory outcome

Solicitors Regulation Authority: Pinsent Masons self-referred to the SRA and agreed to pay the clients' costs arising from the erroneous correspondence; ICC Judge Mullen's judgment stands as a public admonishment, with the SRA investigation to follow. (2026-05-22)

Read our full analysis of this case →