Nº 0600814-85.2022.6.00.0000
Tribunal Superior Eleitoral · Apr 14, 2023
- Jurisdiction
- international
- Court
- Tribunal Superior Eleitoral
- Record ID
- nº-0600814-8520226000000-2023-04-14
- Observed outcome
- The court denied the intervention, ordered the removal of the petition from the record, and imposed a fine of 2,604 BRL for bad-faith litigation.
- Known monetary consequence
- R$2,604
Why this matter warrants attention
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.
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.
Brazilian electoral court fined an attorney for bad-faith ChatGPT submissions - novelty is no defense when the filing is manifestly unfounded.
Failure modes and consequences
- Fake Citations
- Administrative
- Trial
- Monetary
- AI attribution
- Admitted
- Recorded tool
- ChatGPT
- Known monetary consequence
- R$2,604
- Procedural posture
- Interlocutory decision by the Corregedor-Geral da Justiça Eleitoral denying an amicus curiae intervention and imposing a sanction for bad-faith litigation.
Damien Charlotin case archive
Publisher document archive. The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.
Open underlying sourceA recorded source link is not a substitute for checking the underlying order, filing, opinion, or disciplinary record.
What this record does—and does not—establish
The attorney explicitly stated the fable was written with ChatGPT.
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.
Latest evidence review: Primary Document Verified (high confidence).
Controls suggested by the public record
- Verify the existence, citation, court, and precedential status of every authority before filing.
- Escalate unresolved verification failures before filing and preserve the responsible reviewer's signoff record.
- Apply the same source-checking controls to ChatGPT output as to any other research input.
- Read the linked source and subsequent docket history before relying on this record for legal work.