Apelação Cível NU 0000268-31.2023.8.16.0033 (Costarte Eireli Me. v. Churrascão Gaúcho Restaurante Ltda.)
TJPR - 9ª C. Cível · Nov 6, 2025
What happened in this matter?
Outcome: Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree.. The appellant alleged the trial judge's sentence was entirely produced by artificial intelligence and should be annulled. The appellate court held the accusation required unequivocal proof and found none: any AI use was limited to drafting the procedural report and is authorized by Decreto Judiciário nº 421/2024/TJPR; the fundamentation and dispositive were authored by the magistrate. A minor lexical error did not establish AI authorship. The court therefore refused to annul the decision on AI-use grounds.
- Why the court cared
- The structured public record identifies trial and records Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree.. The linked source controls the precise reasoning and procedural context.
- Why it matters now
- This matter connects trial with Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree. in TJPR - 9ª C. Cível. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Why this matter is tracked
Outcome: Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree.. The appellant alleged the trial judge's sentence was entirely produced by artificial intelligence and should be annulled. The appellate court held the accusation required unequivocal proof and found none: any AI use was limited to drafting the procedural report and is authorized by Decreto Judiciário nº 421/2024/TJPR; the fundamentation and dispositive were authored by the magistrate. A minor lexical error did not establish AI authorship. The court therefore refused to annul the decision on AI-use grounds.
This matter connects trial with Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree. in TJPR - 9ª C. Cível. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.
Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Apelação Cível NU 0000268-31.2023.8.16.0033 (Costarte Eireli Me. v. Churrascão Gaúcho Restaurante Ltda.)?
- Outcome: Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree.. The appellant alleged the trial judge's sentence was entirely produced by artificial intelligence and should be annulled. The appellate court held the accusation required unequivocal proof and found none: any AI use was limited to drafting the procedural report and is authorized by Decreto Judiciário nº 421/2024/TJPR; the fundamentation and dispositive were authored by the magistrate. A minor lexical error did not establish AI authorship. The court therefore refused to annul the decision on AI-use grounds.
- Why does Apelação Cível NU 0000268-31.2023.8.16.0033 (Costarte Eireli Me. v. Churrascão Gaúcho Restaurante Ltda.) matter for legal AI risk?
- This matter connects trial with Court rejected the nullity/reform request based on alleged AI authorship, finding no evidence that AI composed the fundamentation or dispositive; only limited use for the sentence report was permitted by local decree. in TJPR - 9ª C. Cível. It provides a source-linked baseline for verification, supervision, and response controls.
- What does the public record establish about Apelação Cível NU 0000268-31.2023.8.16.0033 (Costarte Eireli Me. v. Churrascão Gaúcho Restaurante Ltda.)?
- The record summarizes the outcome described in the linked public source. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
- Which source supports this Apelação Cível NU 0000268-31.2023.8.16.0033 (Costarte Eireli Me. v. Churrascão Gaúcho Restaurante Ltda.) summary?
- The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.
Related matters
Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.