Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000
Tribunal Superior Eleitoral · Apr 14, 2023
What happened in this matter?
The Brazilian Superior Electoral Court sanctioned an attorney for filing a 'fable' co-written with ChatGPT as an amicus curiae submission. The court held that such filings are prohibited in electoral proceedings and that the attorney's conduct constituted bad-faith litigation, resulting in a fine of 2,604 BRL.
- Why the court cared
- The court reasoned that amicus curiae interventions are explicitly prohibited in electoral proceedings by Res.-TSE nº 23.478/2016. Furthermore, the court determined that the attorney, as a legal professional, should have known the submission was inappropriate. The use of AI-generated content to support a filing in a high-profile case was deemed a temerarious act and a violation of the duty to avoid deducing claims known to be unfounded, as per the Brazilian Code of Civil Procedure.
- Why it matters now
- Brazilian electoral court fined an attorney for bad-faith ChatGPT submissions - novelty is no defense when the filing is manifestly unfounded.
Why this matter is tracked
Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Petitioner submitted a 'fábula' produced in collaboration with ChatGPT as the substance of an amicus curiae filing; Court found it inappropriate, removed it from the record and treated the submission as evidence of bad-faith litigation. Outcome: Monetary Sanction. Petitioner (an attorney) filed an amicus request accompanied by a 'fábula' co-written with ChatGPT. TSE held that amicus filings are inapplicable in electoral proceedings (Res.-TSE nº 23.478/2016), found the submission to evidence bad-faith litigation and manifestly unfounded intervention, ordered desentranhamento of the petition and imposed a monetary fine for litigância de má-fé.
Brazilian electoral court fined an attorney for bad-faith ChatGPT submissions - novelty is no defense when the filing is manifestly unfounded.
Record details
What the record establishes about AI use
The attorney explicitly stated the fable was written with ChatGPT.
Interlocutory decision by the Corregedor-Geral da Justiça Eleitoral denying an amicus curiae intervention and imposing a sanction for bad-faith litigation.
Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.
Tracked discrepancy record
1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.
- Fabricated: Exhibits & Submissions | Petitioner submitted a 'fábula' produced in collaboration with ChatGPT as the substance of an amicus curiae filing; Court found it inappropriate, removed it from the record and treated the submission as evidence of bad-faith litigation.
Questions this record answers
- What happened in Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000?
- The Brazilian Superior Electoral Court sanctioned an attorney for filing a 'fable' co-written with ChatGPT as an amicus curiae submission. The court held that such filings are prohibited in electoral proceedings and that the attorney's conduct constituted bad-faith litigation, resulting in a fine of 2,604 BRL.
- Why does Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000 matter for legal AI risk?
- Brazilian electoral court fined an attorney for bad-faith ChatGPT submissions - novelty is no defense when the filing is manifestly unfounded.
- What does the public record establish about Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000?
- 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 Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000 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.