An AI chatbot just successfully sued a company in court and won every single penny
An AI chatbot has helped bring a successful court case in England, getting us ready to ask all sorts of questions over how quickly artificial intelligence is moving into parts of the legal system once reserved for solicitors and barristers.
High-profile errors by AI in recent times have made it easy to be sceptical about the potential of artificial intelligence ever being successfully used in the court system. As noted by The Guardian, international law firm Pinsent Masons was one of the most high-profile examples — referring itself to the Solicitors Regulation Authority twice, both the work of an internal AI system misleading a court.
Now, however, this might be a leading precedent used by supporters who might want to increase reliance on AI-led legal battles in the future.
Advert
In this particular case, freelance HR consultant Tamires Camal Taquidir won an English court case after using Garfield AI to pursue a company over an unpaid debt of £7,000 — the first time a trial has been won in an English court using an AI lawyer.
Taquidir paid the AI law firm about £400 to send a legal letter and then issue court proceedings.
Garfield AI, which was authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority in April last year, can be used to make claims from £30 up to £10,000.
The system handled the legal work before the trial, including the response to a counterclaim brought by the defendant, who had instructed solicitors.
It also prepared four witness statements and a bundle of documents for the three-hour trial at Wandsworth County Court on 14 May, in which the court found in favour of Taquidir and awarded her the money owed.
Philip Young, co-founder of Garfield AI, called the case a ‘landmark moment’ for access to justice, along with Taquidir saying: “I was owed money for work I had done, but it felt like the process of recovering it could be too stressful, expensive and time-consuming. Garfield made it possible for me to pursue the claim and keep going.”
“When the counterclaim was brought, it was intended to intimidate me, but I knew I had accessible, cost-effective and competent support. I’m delighted by the result.”
Although the case does not mean an AI system argued before a judge without human involvement.
Whilst Garfield AI prepared the material before trial, it was actually barrister Dominic Li who represented Taquidir in court.
Li said Garfield presented the client’s case ‘clearly and efficiently’, noted: “The advocacy at trial remained essential and a fundamentally human exercise.”