A judge of the Appellate Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court returned the appeal of the plaintiff, who, on the advice of lawyers, filed it using the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT. The court considered this a manifestation of «disrespect.»
A judge of the Appellate Chamber of the High Anti-Corruption Court returned the appeal of the plaintiff, who, on the advice of lawyers, filed it using the artificial intelligence chatbot ChatGPT. The court considered this a manifestation of «disrespect.»
The register of court decisions indicates that the appeal was filed against the ruling of the investigating judge of the High Anti-Corruption Court, who refused to satisfy the complaint about the inaction of the representative of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine and the prosecutor of the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office.
In the text of the complaint, the applicant admitted that she had appealed to the AI after the advice of lawyers, who refused to file an appeal.
«According to the results of consultations with my two lawyers, who unanimously warned me that given the fact that currently in Ukraine there is a rather high level of judicial and procedural arbitrariness in general, they do not want to charge me for filing an appeal against the said Decision… because they are guaranteed to be sure that there will be the same formal bureaucratic response,» the complaint states.
According to the lawyers, such an appeal is necessary for further consideration at the European Court of Human Rights. However, in order not to incur additional costs for «such a hopeless case,» they recommended that the woman file a complaint using an AI chatbot.
«They advised me to turn to the well-known ChatGPT so that there would be a rather interesting precedent… regarding the confrontation of the logical ChatGPT with the most „fair“ Ukrainian judicial process. Having listened to their advice, I did so,» the appeal states.
The Appeals Chamber noted that the text of the complaint contains unacceptable wording, in particular: «the same formal bureaucratic reply», «a hopeless case as an appeal»,
«fair Ukrainian justice» (with sarcastic quotes).
The court indicated that such statements demonstrate clear contempt for the court, and the use of ChatGPT as a source of argument without a «scientifically proven basis» is contrary to the principles of judicial review.
«I believe that the court should make a decision, in accordance with current legislation, based on the factual circumstances of the case and the expressed legal positions of the participants in the trial, and not based on the emotions of the participant, the personal characteristics provided by him to the court, and information generated by artificial intelligence. I regard the appeal to the position generated by ChatGPT as an abuse of procedural rights, a manifestation of disrespect for the court, as well as for the judicial system in general,» emphasized the judge who considered the appeal.
As a result, the appeal was returned to the applicant without consideration. The decision can be appealed to the cassation instance within three months.
