The Supreme Court of Ukraine emphasized that AI technologies cannot replace a judge and are not a source of scientifically proven information. The use of AI to challenge rulings was also recognized as inadmissible. The decision was originally issued by the Cassation Economic Court on July 8, 2025, in case No. 925/496/24. It considered a […] Сообщение The Supreme Court of Ukraine Prohibits the Use of Grok and ChatGPT Responses as Evidence появились сначала на INCRYPTED.The Supreme Court of Ukraine emphasized that AI technologies cannot replace a judge and are not a source of scientifically proven information. The use of AI to challenge rulings was also recognized as inadmissible. The decision was originally issued by the Cassation Economic Court on July 8, 2025, in case No. 925/496/24. It considered a […] Сообщение The Supreme Court of Ukraine Prohibits the Use of Grok and ChatGPT Responses as Evidence появились сначала на INCRYPTED.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine Prohibits the Use of Grok and ChatGPT Responses as Evidence

2025/08/22 18:11
2분 읽기
이 콘텐츠에 대한 의견이나 우려 사항이 있으시면 [email protected]으로 연락주시기 바랍니다
  • The Supreme Court has ruled that the responses of AI models cannot be considered as evidence in court cases.
  • AI can only be used as an auxiliary tool, not as a substitute for judges and the principles of reliability of evidence.
  • In a particular case involving a land lease agreement, a motion to verify chatbot responses was denied by the court.

The Supreme Court of Ukraine emphasized that AI technologies cannot replace a judge and are not a source of scientifically proven information. The use of AI to challenge rulings was also recognized as inadmissible.

The decision was originally issued by the Cassation Economic Court on July 8, 2025, in case No. 925/496/24. It considered a dispute between the city council and a limited liability company. The case concerned amendments to the land lease agreement and recalculation of rent.

The court rejected the defendant’s request to use Grok and ChatGPT responses as evidence. It pointed out that AI can only serve as an auxiliary tool to support justice, but decisions should be made solely by humans.

After consideration of the case by the Court of Cassation, the materials were transferred to the Supreme Court of Ukraine. This was done to finalize the position on the use of AI responses.

The Special Bench noted that delegating decision-making to technologists violates judicial autonomy. In a particular situation, the defendant was attempting to use AI to challenge decisions that had already been rendered, which was contrary to principles of due process.

The ruling emphasizes that chatbot responses are not a reliable source of information. The refusal to examine them as evidence is recognized as legitimate, and technology should be used only to assist the court, but not to replace judicial analysis.

Thus, the Supreme Court of Ukraine consolidated the position that AI can be a tool for assistance, but not a substitute for a judge. Accordingly, it cannot act as a source of evidence.

Earlier, OpenAI co-founder Sam Altman said that user dialogs from ChatGPT can be used in court proceedings. According to him, this is due to the lack of legal privileges of the product.

Recall, we wrote that in the United States, a law clerk lost his job for using ChatGPT to write lawsuits.

시장 기회
GROK 로고
GROK 가격(GROK)
$0.0004419
$0.0004419$0.0004419
+1.02%
USD
GROK (GROK) 실시간 가격 차트
면책 조항: 본 사이트에 재게시된 글들은 공개 플랫폼에서 가져온 것으로 정보 제공 목적으로만 제공됩니다. 이는 반드시 MEXC의 견해를 반영하는 것은 아닙니다. 모든 권리는 원저자에게 있습니다. 제3자의 권리를 침해하는 콘텐츠가 있다고 판단될 경우, [email protected]으로 연락하여 삭제 요청을 해주시기 바랍니다. MEXC는 콘텐츠의 정확성, 완전성 또는 시의적절성에 대해 어떠한 보증도 하지 않으며, 제공된 정보에 기반하여 취해진 어떠한 조치에 대해서도 책임을 지지 않습니다. 본 콘텐츠는 금융, 법률 또는 기타 전문적인 조언을 구성하지 않으며, MEXC의 추천이나 보증으로 간주되어서는 안 됩니다.

No Chart Skills? Still Profit

No Chart Skills? Still ProfitNo Chart Skills? Still Profit

Copy top traders in 3s with auto trading!