{"slug": "lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well", "title": "Lawyer used fake AI cases to defend himself at tribunal and it didn't end well", "summary": "The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal struck off registered foreign lawyer Abhishek Kumar after he used generative AI to draft a disciplinary response containing false and misleading case citations, then used AI again to explain the errors, producing further mistakes. The tribunal rated Kumar's culpability for the AI-related misconduct as \"very high\" and said he would have been struck off on the basis of either his 2024 criminal conviction for knowingly employing a person not legally entitled to work in the UK or the AI-related misconduct alone. Kumar, 41, who became a registered foreign lawyer in 2018, received a 12-month community order and 150 hours of unpaid work for the criminal conviction and was removed from the register of foreign lawyers.", "body_md": "Struck off\n\n \n\n**A registered foreign lawyer who used AI-generated false and misleading case citations while defending himself against disciplinary charges has been struck off.**\n\nAbhishek Kumar turned to generative AI to help draft his response to proceedings brought by the Solicitors Regulation Authority (SRA), only for the tech to spit out misleading quotations and incorrect legal authorities. After the errors were flagged by the regulator, Kumar used AI again to help prepare an explanation, which itself contained further errors.\n\n[The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) found](https://solicitorstribunal.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/12884-2026-Kumar-.pdf) that Kumar had failed to properly check the material he was putting before both the regulator and the tribunal, describing his culpability for the AI-related misconduct as “very high”.\n\nThe 41-year-old had originally been referred to the tribunal following a criminal conviction for knowingly employing a person who was not legally entitled to work in the UK. He became a registered foreign lawyer in 2018.\n\nThe individual at the centre of the criminal case had previously been Kumar’s immigration client and later carried out administrative work while being paid cash in hand despite having no right to work in the UK. Kumar was convicted in 2024 and received a 12-month community order together with 150 hours of unpaid work.\n\nWhen the SRA brought disciplinary proceedings, Kumar filed a written response containing incorrect and misleading case citations. Some of the citations were wrong or pointed to unrelated cases, while other authorities did not support the points he was making.\n\nKumar admitted that he had used generative AI to assist with drafting the document. But when the SRA highlighted the problems and asked for an explanation, he again used AI to help prepare his response, resulting in yet more errors.\n\nHe told the tribunal that he had not intended to mislead anyone and argued that the mistakes reflected incompetence and poor judgment rather than dishonesty or a lack of integrity. Kumar also said he was accustomed to working under supervision and did not have the expertise needed to properly verify the AI-generated output.\n\nThe tribunal didn’t agree. It said Kumar was a regulated lawyer who was obliged to comply with professional standards and remained responsible for the accuracy of his work.\n\nThe SDT found that Kumar had used AI “without giving any proper thought to the consequences” and had failed to take adequate steps to check whether the material it produced was reliable. It also placed significant weight on the fact that he used AI a second time when responding to the mistakes created by his first use of the technology.\n\nThe tribunal said the repeated failure to verify submissions had serious implications for the administration of justice and public confidence in the legal profession.\n\nIt stressed that Kumar would have been struck off on the basis of either the criminal conviction or the AI-related misconduct alone.\n\nHe was removed from the register of foreign lawyers.", "url": "https://wpnews.pro/news/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well", "canonical_source": "https://www.legalcheek.com/2026/09/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-disciplinary-tribunal-and-it-didnt-end-well/", "published_at": "2026-09-13 09:15:12+00:00", "updated_at": "2026-09-13 10:05:56.137095+00:00", "lang": "en", "topics": ["ai-ethics", "ai-policy"], "entities": ["Abhishek Kumar", "Solicitors Regulation Authority", "Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal"], "alternates": {"html": "https://wpnews.pro/news/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well", "markdown": "https://wpnews.pro/news/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well.md", "text": "https://wpnews.pro/news/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well.txt", "jsonld": "https://wpnews.pro/news/lawyer-used-fake-ai-cases-to-defend-himself-at-tribunal-and-it-didn-t-end-well.jsonld"}}