Earlier this week, Alexander Bradford, instructed by JG Poole & Co LLP on behalf of Birmingham City University, successfully secured a wasted costs order in a long-running case between the university and a former student.
The former student initially brought a claim against the university for breach of contract, negligence and fraud. The former student’s solicitors subsequently submitted an application to the court on 10 July 2025 which cited two cases that turned out to be fictitious. The university’s solicitors wrote to the former student’s solicitors the following day to inform them that they had been unable to locate the cases, and invited the former student’s solicitors to provide copies. The former student’s solicitors did not provide a response to the letter, but instead simply withdrew and re-submitted the application without the fictitious cases, stating to the court that the previous application had been submitted “in error”.
The former student’s claim and her application were struck out with indemnity costs on 30 July 2025. The issue of the false citations and wasted costs was adjourned by the court to be listed before the Designated Circuit Judge for Birmingham.
The former student’s solicitor filed witness statements on 18 August and 10 October 2025, which explained how the fake cases came to be included in the application. The solicitor accepted that the cases had been AI-generated and were fictitious. The solicitor’s evidence was that a member of the administrative team had drafted the application using a built-in AI research feature of a widely used legal software. That staff member had submitted the application without the solicitor’s knowledge, had not verified the authorities cited, and had signed the statement of truth personally in the solicitor’s name without his knowledge or consent.
Applying the guidance of the Divisional Court in Ayinde v London Borough of Haringey [2025] EWHC 1383 (Admin), His Honour Judge Charman held that the behaviour of the solicitor and the firm had been improper, unreasonable and negligent, that his explanation was inadequate, and the threshold for a wasted costs order had been met. HHJ Charman awarded wasted costs against the solicitor’s firm on the indemnity basis, and ordered a transcript of the judgment to be published on the judicial website.
This decision serves as a further reminder of the importance of the risks that large language models pose to the administration of justice. It also provides an example of an application of the guidance in Ayinde.
Alexander wishes to extend particular thanks to Leonie Salter, of JG Poole & Co LLP, and Gary Dalton and Matt Taylor, respectively Head of Legal Services and in-house counsel at Birmingham City University, for their hard work on this long-running case.
