01
Factual background & dispute
- The consumer bought tickets in reliance on the chatbot’s statement that a bereavement fare could be requested within 90 days, then sought a fare adjustment.
- The first request was made on 17 November, before the return journey on 18 November.
- Another webpage stated the correct policy. The decision did not identify the chatbot as an LLM or establish a generative AI architecture.
02
Core issues & judicial focus
- Whether an enterprise bears liability for information provided by its automated customer service
- Whether accurate terms published elsewhere on the website negate the effect of inaccurate chatbot statements
03
Judicial finding & holding
- The tribunal found the airline failed to reasonably ensure the accuracy of chatbot information and that reliance was reasonable on the facts. Correct information and a link elsewhere on the website did not remove liability.
- The negligent-misrepresentation analysis addressed duty, negligence, reasonable reliance, damage and causation. The award was CAD 650.88 damages, CAD 36.14 prejudgment interest and CAD 125 fees, totalling CAD 812.02.
- The case establishes fault-based liability on its facts, not absolute liability for every chatbot output or a rule that all outputs form contractual promises.
04
Practical risk implications
01Customer service chatbots should connect to controlled knowledge bases with designated update owners.
02Information involving pricing, refunds, commitments, and eligibility criteria requires human verification and spot checks.
03Enterprises should preserve records of erroneous answers, user feedback, and revision workflows.