Latest news with #Forey
Business Mayor
24-05-2025
- Politics
- Business Mayor
Barrister did not appreciate seriousness of fake citations, High Court hears
A barrister undergoing pupillage did not appreciate the seriousness of citing cases that did not exist, the High Court heard this morning. The hearing before Dame Victoria Sharp, president of the King's Bench Division and Mr Justice Johnson was ordered by Sharp over two separate cases in which non-existent authorities were cited. The judges will consider whether to initiate contempt of court proceedings. This morning, the case of Frederick Ayinde v The London Borough of Haringey was discussed in which Sarah Forey, instructed by Haringey Law Centre, was found to have cited false authorities. For Forey, Helen Evans KC of 4 New Square told the court that Forey was, at the material time, a pupil barrister and was given probationary tenancy at 3 Bolt Court in May this year. Forey, who is dyslexic, did not have access to LexisNexis or other research materials, or the White Book when researching cases and had developed 'over time' a 'workaround' when researching and putting together information which she added to a table. The table, the court heard, had since been deleted by Forey on advice from a 'senior member of chambers' and had not been recovered. 'In order to support the work she was doing, she researched principles and authorities' using a number of different websites and 'various online legal blogs and websites', Evans said. 'She used these sites to find cases and legal principles and added them to her personal table. She would also use search engines such as Google and Safari to search legislation. Miss Forey says she did that in relation to her table when she drafted the grounds for Ayinde. Read More SRA probing 20 solicitors and firms over Post Office scandal 'Although she did not know she had used AI facilities by which she means ChatGPT, she now understands Google and Safari will sometimes produce AI commentary or overview. 'It did not register with her that it was AI-generated.' The court heard Forey 'received little supervision'. Evans added: 'Miss Forey's perception is that she was effectively left to her own devices. [She was] inadequately supervised and inadequately resourced as well in terms of what was made available or not made available to her to do her work. She had no access to anything like LexisNexis or online databases or textbooks.' The court heard Forey 'completely underestimated the importance and seriousness of what was being said' when a letter was sent by the council questioning some of the authorities cited by Forey. Forey was 'of the view those cases [flagged by the council] would be locatable'. Evans said: 'Miss Forey accepts with the benefit of hindsight [it] was the wrong way to go about it but she did not appreciate it at the time.' Evans said Forey did not appreciate the seriousness of citing authorities that did not exist when the principles were correct. She added: 'To put it more colloquially, as long as the tin existed and had the right content, the label on the tin was not a serious matter. The fact she had named a case she could not find was not a matter she regarded as serious. She thought there would be alternative authorities for those positions. She was confident her table was correct when she had drawn it up. Read More Would-be solicitors offered new app to access work experience 'The seriousness of the matter just had not registered with her.' The court heard Forey had reported herself to the Bar Standards Board following Mr Justice Ritchie's judgment in April in which he found five fake cases to have been cited. Evans said the BSB was the appropriate forum to deal with Forey's conduct. She added: 'Miss Forey has asked me to finish by repeating her apology.' Andrew Edge, for Haringey Law Centre which instructed Forey, said the centre was an 'overstretched charitable resource doing its very best with a lack of any resources…doing incredibly important work and only able to do that important work by being heavily dependent on counsel'. He told the court that the Solicitors Regulation Authority 'is already investigating' and the regulator had 'all the powers to deal with' the conduct. 'It would be disproportionate to do more,' Edge added. The hearing continues.
Metro
09-05-2025
- Metro
Judge scolds barrister for using 'made-up cases' in her court arguments
A High Court judge has condemned a team of lawyers for basing arguments on five cases which turned out to be 'made-up'. Barrister Sarah Forey was instructed by solicitors at Haringey Law Centre to act for a homeless man who was claiming priority housing from Haringey Council in London. Ms Forey cited a number of cases – examples of previous legal rulings used to support an argument – in written submissions to the High Court. Lawyers for the council said they could not find five of the cases, suggesting the only explanation would be that Ms Forey used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools. They asked for clarification from Haringey Law Centre, who dismissed the issue as 'cosmetic errors' and said any problems were 'easily explained'. Haringey Law Centre lawyer Sunnelah Hussain suggested the council lawyers raised the matter 'as technicalities to avoid undertaking really serious legal research'. The presiding judge, Mr Justice Ritchie, blasted Haringey Law Centre's response as 'grossly unprofessional'. In his ruling on the case, he said the solicitors and Ms Forey had shown 'appalling professional misbehaviour'. He said he was unable to reach a verdict on whether they did use AI 'because Ms Forey was not sworn in and was not cross examined'. But he accused them of 'misleading the Court' by submitting 'fake cases' and then trying to 'finesse them into being 'minor citation errors''. The judge also dismissed Ms Forey's claim that the error arose from filing and photocopying mistakes, saying: 'I do not accept that it is possible to photocopy a non-existent case and tabulate it.' He said the team had presented a 'reasonable and fair' case, suggesting they would have had a strong chance to win if they hadn't used the fake cases. More Trending Mr Justice Ritchie continued: 'The submission was a good one. The medical evidence was strong. The ground was potentially good. Why put a fake case in? 'On the balance of probabilities, I consider that it would have been negligent for this barrister, if she used AI and did not check it, to put that text into her pleading.' The judge ordered his ruling to be sent Bar Standards Board and the Solicitors Regulation Authority, saying Ms Forey and Haringey Law Centres should self-report to the watchdogs. The case was settled in favour of the homeless man, Frederick Ayinde, but ordered Ms Forey's team to pay wasted court costs. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: Mum wins court appeal to stop daughter having to stay overnight with rapist dad MORE: Harry claims police protection withdrawn to 'trap' him and Meghan in UK
