Incident Tracker / United Kingdom
Lodhia v Twelve Trees, [2026] EWHC 1889 (KB)
·High Court of England and Wales, King's Bench Division (Media and Communications List)·UKCosts order
Linden J in the High Court of England and Wales found that a litigant in person had fabricated or doctored documents and rejected his claim that they were AI hallucinations. The court imposed indemnity costs and a three-year civil restraint order, and referred him to the Attorney General and his barrister to the Bar Standards Board.
- Court
- High Court of England and Wales, King's Bench Division (Media and Communications List)
- Date
- 2026-07-24
- Who used the AI
- Litigant in person
- AI tool
- Not identified in the record
- Conduct
- Litigant in person Amar Lodhia produced doctored or fabricated documents, including a university email, a fictitious 'Section 5A' inclusion-plan clause, an altered court order, false certificates of service and a false N260 costs statement claiming about GBP 82,800, and blamed AI hallucinations. Linden J rejected that explanation and certified several applications as totally without merit.
- Outcome
- Costs order
- Penalty
- No monetary penalty recorded
- Regulatory outcome
- Bar Standards Board: Linden J referred direct-access counsel Mr Chiffers of JSC Chambers to the BSB. The litigant himself was referred to the Attorney General for possible contempt proceedings, with a police referral. No BSB disposition on record. (2026-07-24)
- Status
- Verified against listed sources
- Last checked
- 2026-09-03
Primary sources for this incident
Related regulation records for this incident
No related regulation record has been linked to this incident yet.
Cite this record
SafeLegalAI Global Legal AI Incident Tracker, “Lodhia v Twelve Trees, [2026] EWHC 1889 (KB)”, safelegalai.com/tracker/lodhia-v-twelve-trees (accessed 2026-09-04). Data: CC BY 4.0.