What began as a relatively common 2025 mishap (a lawyer filing a factum containing several non-existent cases generated by ChatGPT) has evolved into one of the most significant judicial warnings yet about the responsibilities that accompany generative AI in legal practice.
On 4 December 2025, Justice Myers released a meticulous 15-page endorsement in Ko v. Li (2025 ONSC 6785) that re-opens criminal contempt proceedings against Toronto lawyer Jisuh Lee on grounds far more serious than the original AI hallucination incident.
The story now centres not on the initial failure to verify citations, but on what happened afterward. In the weeks following the May 2025 hearing, Ms. Lee provided explanations that attributed preparation of the problematic factum to staff and a student. The court initially accepted her expressions of remorse and closed the first contempt file in late May. Four months later, in a September 2025 letter, Ms. Lee wrote to the court voluntarily disclosing that she had personally drafted the document, had personally used the AI tool, and had then made inaccurate statements about others’ involvement because she felt overwhelming fear and embarrassment.
Justice Myers concluded that deliberately misleading the court during a contempt proceeding itself constitutes a fresh and distinctly grave interference with the administration of justice. He therefore issued a new show-cause order in October and, after a case conference on 2 December, has now appointed experienced criminal counsel Dean Embry of Embry Dann LLP as amicus curiae, with the Attorney General funding the appointment, to ensure the next steps are fair, thorough, and principled.
The matter has been referred to the Crown. A full hearing with sworn evidence and cross-examination is expected once amicus has assisted in charting the path forward. A further case conference is to be scheduled no later than the end of January 2026.
This case has moved well beyond the routine sanctions and Law Society referrals that have characterised most earlier AI-citation incidents. Justice Myers emphasised that when officers of the court make untruthful statements while attempting to resolve a contempt proceeding, the issues strike at the very foundation of public confidence in the judicial process.
For the profession, the message is clear and uncompromising: the duty of absolute candour to the court becomes even more acute when something has already gone wrong. Early and complete transparency, however painful, remains the only reliable route when an AI-assisted error is discovered.
The proceeding continues. No finding of contempt has yet been entered, and Ms. Lee is presumed innocent of the allegations unless and until proven otherwise beyond a reasonable doubt.
