Eigen RadarAI
Archive
Analysis

Brazil’s Rio bar seeks a place in the lawsuit against Enter’s legal AI

Rio de Janeiro’s bar association has applied to join the São Paulo bar’s lawsuit against Enter, an AI legal-services company. It adopted the existing claims without adding a separate demand. The requested remedies concern human supervision, lawyers’ freedom to reject drafts, professional confidentiality and logs of generation and review. The intervention and remedies await judicial consideration.

Artificial Intelligence··Evening
A rear-facing person places an envelope beside a case binder at a counter with a Brazilian flag.

Rio’s bar seeks to join the existing São Paulo case

The Rio de Janeiro section of Brazil’s bar association, OAB/RJ, applied on October 9 to join the São Paulo section’s civil public action against Talisman AI, the company operating as Enter. The application concerns AI tools that analyze lawsuits, recommend strategies and prepare legal drafts. Rio’s section adopted the existing case’s grounds, evidence and requests without submitting an autonomous claim. The fourth federal civil court in São Paulo has not yet decided its application.[1]

The intervention extends the dispute to the Rio section, which says companies using the platform operate nationally and appear in Rio de Janeiro’s state, federal and labor courts. Rio’s bar wants lawyers to retain supervision over strategy and legal documents prepared with AI assistance.[1], [2]

Lawyers’ responsibility is at the centre of the allegations

São Paulo’s bar alleges that Enter’s operating model carries out activities reserved for lawyers through a company not registered with the bar and weakens the responsible lawyer’s effective participation. Rio’s section says the model can affect lawyers signing documents in firms and corporate legal departments, as well as those representing consumers and workers. The allegations remain the plaintiffs’ position, with no reported ruling establishing unlawful conduct by Enter.[1]

The requested safeguards cover draft review and confidentiality

The lawsuit seeks identification of the lawyer responsible for reviewing AI-assisted text and freedom to reject a suggested draft. Other requests cover human supervision of strategy, protection of professional confidentiality and personal data, auditing and traceability, preservation of generation and review logs, and collective moral damages. OAB/RJ president Ana Tereza Basilio argues that technology should remain subordinate to lawyers’ responsibility and technical independence. The court still has to consider the requested remedies.[1]

References

  1. News sourceMigalhasBrazil’s OAB/RJ seeks to join lawsuit over Enter’s legal services↩1↩2↩3↩4
  2. News sourceGRU PlayBrazil’s Rio bar seeks to join action against Enter’s legal AI↩
AI safety and regulationChip wars and the supply chain

More analysis from this desk

View all Brief analyses from the Artificial Intelligence desk →