It's sad that it took the highest court in the country to point out lack of professionalism and misconduct.

The judge took no personal responsibility.

> She told the court that this was her first time using an AI tool and she had believed the citations to be "genuine". She had no intention to misquote or misrepresent the rulings and that "the mistake occurred solely due to the reliance on an automatic source", the high court wrote.

She had one job. And that was to read the citations. Instead of owning up to the mistake of being lazy all she wanted to talk about "intentions".

The high court also took no responsibility.

> In its order, the high court said that "the citations may be non-existent, but if the learned trial court has considered the correct principles of law and its application to the facts of the case is also correct,

This line of reasoning is questionable and attempt to gaslight everyone. Judges cite other cases in their judgement. But if the junior judge had no clue that the references were fake what correct principles was she applying?

End of the day maybe the judgement is correct but this overall bullshit.

Given that this is happening all over the world people seem to have a convenient excuse - The AI made me do it.