Odessan woman won a lawsuit with the help of AI: how she did it and how much she saved.

According to ТСН: A resident of Odesa, Oleksandra Korin, decided to save on legal services and won a lawsuit by using artificial intelligence. She used ChatGPT to prepare her claim and managed to navigate the 'Electronic Court' system on her own.

How AI helped the woman

Oleksandra explains that she chose the independent path because her case did not require deep legal knowledge — extension of the deadline for filing an inheritance claim. She spent a week drafting the document at night when her child was asleep.

'It was colossal work, but I can focus on large volumes of text. When my child went to bed, I sat down and worked,' says Oleksandra Korin, the plaintiff.

Artificial intelligence also suggested that she turn to the new system:

'It suggested that I could apply through the electronic court,' she notes.

Oleksandra calculated that she saved about a thousand dollars, spending only on the ChatGPT subscription and court fees. According to her, she and her virtual assistant spent approximately the same amount of effort, although the woman always supervised the AI's work to avoid the creation of fictitious laws.

The first attempt was unsuccessful

The court confirms that success did not come immediately:

'The first application submitted by the party did not meet the requirements for a claim at all. If the prepared claim is not qualified, it may be denied,' says Ihor Babuik, the judge-spokesman of the Khadzhybei District Court of Odesa.

The specialist notes that a real lawyer would not have made such a mistake. Lawyer Oleksandr Mukonin claims:

'Artificial intelligence often makes things up. Let's put it this way, there is a Ukrainian saying: cheap fish means bad soup; applying artificial intelligence in legal matters is not always appropriate.'

The lawyer adds that seeking help from AI is only possible in simple cases, otherwise the consequences can be fatal.

Victory and lack of restrictions

In Oleksandra's case, the court's decision was in her favor. After returning the case, she corrected the mistake, and the judge made a positive decision.

The fact that the claim was drafted with the help of artificial intelligence was not suspected in court. At the same time, it is noted that there are no restrictions regarding this.

The courts emphasize that due to the high cost of legal services during the war, more and more people are turning to AI for help. However, a massive wave of lawsuits prepared by artificial intelligence is not expected.

Judges caution that only those who have won tell stories of successful use of virtual assistants. A complete replacement of real lawyers by AI is not yet possible.

This story occurs in the context of the growing popularity of AI technologies in Ukraine, where many people are looking for ways to save on legal expenses. Perhaps Oleksandra's example will become an impetus for others who dare to try new solutions in legal affairs, but it is important to remember the risks and limitations associated with using artificial intelligence in such complex situations as court proceedings.