AI Law Firm Wins UK Court Case For First Time
- Reference: 0184033636
- News link: https://yro.slashdot.org/story/26/06/22/1657204/ai-law-firm-wins-uk-court-case-for-first-time
- Source link:
> After attempting to resolve a dispute over paid fees without court action, Camal Taquidir [...] used Garfield AI to help her pursue the case in court. She was able to generate pre-action correspondence, and then prepare and issue court proceedings. The AI legal assistant conducted all of the legal work preceding the court trial. The defendant instructed solicitors and brought a counterclaim, which the claimant disputed with the support of Garfield AI.
>
> The claimant [3]continued to trial , including dealing with document production, the preparation witness statements and trial bundles. Garfield then instructed a junior, shortly before the trial began. She won the claim over unpaid fees following a three-hour trial at Wandsworth County Court. The claimant paid around 400 pounds in Garfield AI fees to recover the 7,000 pounds owed, while the defendant instructed both a solicitor and a barrister. [...] Following a three-hour trial at Wandsworth County Court on 14 May 2026, in which both sides were represented by barristers, the court found in favor of the claimant, awarding 7,000 pounds and dismissing the counterclaim.
[1] https://www.garfield.law/
[2] https://www.computerweekly.com/news/366644941/Artificial-intelligence-based-law-firm-wins-in-court
[3] https://www.garfield.law/blog/small-debt-claim-trial-preparation-guide
The storm's coming (Score:2)
I don't think it'd technically be illegal to write up the counterclaim with prompt injection attacks, wording that purposely confuses the AI, pronoun reference confusion, and other tactics. You tell me some scumbag lawyer that's defending a company that knows it's in the wrong but will drag their feet won't resort to that.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think it'd technically be illegal to write up the counterclaim with prompt injection attacks
As amusing as it is to think about I can think of multiple ways that would not just be civilly unlawful, but criminally illegal. Our hypothetical scumbag lawyer would well be in danger of triggering all sorts of wire fraud, contempt of court, and tortious interference claims and charges.
£400 total? (Score:3)
I understand that the AI fees are low, but how did they get a barrister in court for three hours for £400? Is there actually someone out there that is desperate for courtroom experience such that they will take a £100 an hour fee?
Re: (Score:2)
It did mention they were a junior, so yes probably greatly reduced fees. This would have been County Court too, Small Claims Track, so in theory you don't even need a legal rep. For £7k you might want one anyway, especially if the case is complex.
The law is made of words (Score:2)
LLMs are good with words
I suspect that LLMs will be very good at the law once their accuracy improves
Re: (Score:2)
Which is the best kind of correct.
Though someone else is supposed to be handling the Futurama quotes. Where the heck is he when needed?
AI Lawyers do their homework? (Score:3)
If an LLM attorney is smart enough to actually check that the cases they reference actually exist, we can be confident than they're better than a certain percent of human lawyers.
Sigh. (Score:1)
"Following a three-hour trial at Wandsworth County Court on 14 May 2026, in which both sides were represented by barristers, the court found in favor of the claimant,"
So... no... AI didn't win a case.
But not on Monday. (Score:1)
Someone has to say it. This can only be available Tuesday-Friday, because it hates Mondays.