This week in legal AI — Brazil

5 updates on the record, 2026-03-25 to 2026-10-07.

• Analysis · 2026-10-05
  Must lawyers tell clients, or ask their consent, before using AI?
  Italy legislates a duty to inform, the Netherlands asks for consent, Belgium and Germany say there is no duty: 76 reviewed country answers on telling clients.
• Incident · Brazil · 2026-08-13
  Apelacao Civel 1032884-04.2025.8.26.0224 (TJSP, 36a Camara de Direito Privado)
  The Tribunal de Justica de Sao Paulo, deciding a defective-car consumer appeal, found the plaintiff's lawyer had used AI without critical review to cite fabricated precedents. Treating this as bad-faith litigation, it imposed a fine of 2 percent of the value of the claim and sent the ruling to the Sao Paulo and Federal bar councils.
  Primary source: TJSP, Apelacao Civel 1032884-04.2025.8.26.0224, Registro 2026.0000779792 (13 Aug 2026), acordao (Charlotin database archive PDF)
• Incident · Brazil · unverified · 2026-08-03
  Processo 0001601-72.2025.5.20.0005 (TRT-20, 1a Turma, Sergipe)
  A panel of the Tribunal Regional do Trabalho da 20a Regiao in Sergipe, Brazil, fined a company 5 percent of the claim value for bad-faith litigation after its lawyer's AI-drafted appeal cited invented precedents, including a 2015 ministerial vote discussing PIX, a payment system created in 2020. The court forwarded the file to the Brazilian Bar for ethics review.
  Primary source: Sergipe Noticias, August 2026 (press report; primary decision not located)
• Incident · Brazil · 2026-07-22
  Apelacao Civel 0035599-44.2017.8.16.0014 (TJPR)
  A judge of the Tribunal de Justica do Parana in Brazil refused to hear a consumer appeal whose brief relied on what the decision called creative jurisprudence produced by AI, including an unlocatable Santa Catarina precedent and an unverifiable headnote. The appeal was not admitted for lack of dialecticity and the state bar was notified for professional measures.
  Primary source: TJPR, Apelacao Civel 0035599-44.2017.8.16.0014 (22 Jul 2026), monocratic decision (Charlotin database archive PDF)
• Rule revised · CNJ · 2026-03-25
  Resolução CNJ nº 615/2025: Use of Artificial Intelligence in the Judiciary — As amended by Resolução CNJ nº 674/2026
  Resolution 674 of 25 March 2026 (DJe/CNJ 71/2026, 26 March 2026; in force on publication) rewrote art. 15 §1 and §1(I): the National AI Committee no longer has a fixed 14 full and 13 alternate members, and the CNJ councillor seats rise from two to three, including at least one member of the Permanent IT and Innovation Commission and the CNJ councillor responsible for personal-data processing. No other article was amended. Resolution 615/2025 of Brazil's National Council of Justice, approved 11 March 2025, effective 14 July 2025 and amended on committee composition by Resolution 674/2026, replaces Resolution 332/2020 for the judiciary. It classifies AI uses by risk, requires human supervision, creates a National AI Committee, and permits judges and staff to use LLMs within those controls.
  Primary source: CNJ — As amended by Resolução CNJ nº 674/2026

Source: SafeLegalAI (safelegalai.com), published by SafeLegalAI. Data CC BY 4.0. Scope: Brazil. As of 2026-10-07. Records report public court, regulator and vendor documents and are not legal advice; names and marks belong to their owners; provided without warranty. Records: safelegalai.com/tracker/brazil · Feed: RSS