Just over a year ago, I wrote a blog on artificial intelligence (AI): what it is, what hallucinations are, and what the consequences are for lawyers who fail to fulfil their professional responsibilities.[1] Since then, there have been unexpected developments in one of the cases included in that blog.

Ko v Li: What we Knew a Year Ago

The proceeding initially before the Court in Ko v Li was a mix of family law and estate applications. The actual applications are not the reason Ko v Li is getting cited. Rather, the parties’ names and private matters were unfortunately dragged into what has become a potentially precedent-setting case about a lawyer misusing AI. A lawyer in the proceeding, who was nearing the end of her 30-year career, submitted a factum with hallucinated cases.[2] The lawyer was potentially going to be held in contempt of court.

An endorsement by Myers J in May 2025, appeared to be the conclusion of the matter. Myers J conditionally dismissed the show cause proceeding, after the lawyer took accountability for not checking a factum that she said was prepared by a student.[3] There were financial and reputational consequences for the lawyer, but that and some additional professional development training appeared to be the end of things.[4]

New Endorsement Re October 6, 2025, Proceedings

The lawyer from Ko v Li has been ordered again to show cause why she should not be held in contempt of court. The contempt of court hearing is not for the AI hallucinations in her factum in Ko v Li. Raher, the show cause hearing is for the allegedly untruthful submissions she made at the previous (may, 2025) show cause hearing about her AI-generated factum.[5] Here is a rough breakdown of what has happened since the May show cause hearing:

• The endorsement following the initial show cause hearing was released May 20, 2025.
• In June 2025, the Law Society of Ontario advised the lawyer that they would be investigating her conduct.[6]
• On September 30, 2025, the lawyer sent an unsolicited letter to the Court admitting that she was the one who used ChatGPT to draft the factum, not a student.[7]
• The Law Society’s investigator apparently sent a recommendation to the Law Society regarding next steps shortly after the lawyer sent her September 2025 letter to the Court.[8]
• A new contempt proceeding against the lawyer was commenced on October 6, 2025.[9]

What Happens Next

The proceeding will continue in the civil branch of the court but under a new title, with His Majesty the King as the applicant and the lawyer as the respondent.[10]

Additionally, the Law Society of Ontario has commenced a proceeding against the lawyer regarding the original AI misuse and her subsequent conduct.[11]

—

[1] https://welpartners.com/blog/2025/06/growing-professional-obligations-surrounding-ai-hallucinations/ See also Guess What?! Ai is a Tool Not a Substitute for Legal Judgment | WEL Partners Blog

[2]Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 2965 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kc6xx> at para 53.

Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 2965 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kc6xx> at para 74; Ko v. Li, 2026 ONSC 538 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/khtzx> at paras 6-10.

[4] Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 2965 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kc6xx>  at para 65.

[5] Ko v. Li, 2026 ONSC 538 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/khtzx> at paras 1 & 16.

[6]  Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 6785 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kgvr8> at para 13.

[7] Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 6785 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kgvr8> at paras 1 & 15.

[8] Ko v. Li, 2025 ONSC 6785 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/kgvr8> Ibid at para 34.

[9] Ko v. Li, 2026 ONSC 538 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/khtzx> at para 7.

[10] Ko v. Li, 2026 ONSC 538 (CanLII), <https://canlii.ca/t/khtzx> at paras 6 & 9.

[11] Law Society Tribunal Hearing Division, January 23, 2026, File No: 26H-012, https://lawsocietytribunal.ca/document-html/lee-26h-012-noa/; for more on how Law Society Tribunal hearings work, see https://lawsocietytribunal.ca/a-guide-to-conduct-proceedings/