Named AI accountability
Each material AI system has named business, technical and risk accountability.
A Canadian tribunal found Air Canada liable after a customer relied on incorrect chatbot guidance about retroactive bereavement fares.
The tribunal ordered damages, interest and fees; the case became a widely cited example of organisational responsibility for customer-facing AI information.
Inconsistent information between the chatbot and the airline's published policy, with insufficient control over authoritative customer guidance.
Tribunal remedy to the customer; organisations have since cited the case as a governance lesson for AI-enabled customer advice.
This record should inform control design, testing and monitoring for comparable AI systems. The incident database does not infer that every system using the same provider or model shares the same failure.
These are CRG methodology mappings from the documented incident to controls worth testing in comparable systems. They do not assert that any single control would have prevented the incident.
Each material AI system has named business, technical and risk accountability.
Known failure modes including hallucination and instruction failure are explicitly tested.
Known limitations and out-of-scope uses are communicated to operators and users.
Material performance, safety, security and cost signals are monitored after release.
British Columbia Civil Resolution Tribunal / public decision record · confidence 92% · last verified 23 Aug 2026
Open underlying source