The use of artificial intelligence is not prohibited; however, responsibility for the accuracy of materials submitted to the court rests solely with the party to the case.
Using AI to prepare procedural documents without proper verification violates the principle of good faith in exercising procedural rights. This was emphasized by the Administrative Cassation Court within the Supreme Court, Korrespondent.net reported, as conveyed by the PromPolitInform portal.
The court found that the cassation appeal contained references to Supreme Court rulings that do not exist, indicating possible AI “hallucinations.”
The Supreme Court refused to open cassation proceedings on the complaint of the Main Department of the Pension Fund of Ukraine in the Zhytomyr region, establishing that the appeal was justified by references to court decisions that do not exist and fabricated legal positions.
The court determined that the case numbers, ruling dates, and “quotations” cited in the complaint were absent from the Unified State Register of Court Decisions or did not correspond to the actual content of judicial acts.
The Supreme Court noted that the nature of such references may indicate the use of artificial intelligence tools and so-called AI “hallucinations.”
The ruling stressed that while the use of AI is not prohibited, the responsibility for the accuracy of submitted materials lies entirely with the party to the case. Submitting false information was regarded by the court as a violation of the principle of good faith.
