Judgments and Decisions in AI Matters

A joint ruling in consolidated cases arising from a tender for the maintenance of provincial roads in the Małopolska region (lot no. 7).

An order dismissing an interlocutory appeal against the refusal to stay enforcement of a VAT decision (first instance: Provincial Administrative Court in Łódź, I SA/Łd 50/26).

Two cases were referred to a Divisional Court and listed together under the Hamid jurisdiction, the court’s own inherent power to enforce practitioners’ duties to the court.

Authors sued the AI model developer over the use of their books to train it; the dispute ended in a class-action settlement approved as final on 20 July 2026, so no precedent on the merits was established.

The claimant generated an image using Stable Diffusion by entering positive and negative prompts and setting the number of generation steps, dimensions, guidance scale, and random seed, repeatedly adjusted the parameters, then selected and published one of the resulting versions.

The Austrian public employment service implemented a model that calculated the probability of returning to the labour market and assigned unemployed persons to one of three prospect segments (the system known in the media as the “AMS algorithm”).

In 2022, the UK supervisory authority imposed a £7.5 million fine and an accompanying order on the company, alleging that it scraped photographs of UK residents from the open internet and social media to feed a worldwide facial-recognition database made available to clients outside the country; the Upper Tribunal later held the first-tier tribunal’s no-jurisdiction ruling to be a material error of law and remitted the case for reconsideration on the merits, so as of this entry neither the fine nor the order has been reinstated.

The case concerned access to health benefits for a child on the autism spectrum.

After the authority requested information, the companies responded that they did not operate in Italy and were not subject to European law.

The authority concluded its proceedings concerning ChatGPT by imposing a EUR 15 million fine and ordering a six-month public-awareness campaign in the Italian media; this decision was later annulled by the Rome Tribunal (18 March 2026) for lack of jurisdiction of the Italian authority, without the substantive complaints being decided.

Proceedings against the American company providing the chatbot, against which the authority had already imposed a prior limitation on processing.

A case concerning six musical works, including “Atemlos durch die Nacht,” “Forever Young,” and the “Mambo No. 5” refrain, against a US-based music-generator provider.

The first trial in Europe concerning the training of an image generator to be decided on the merits after a full hearing.

Ride-hailing platform drivers challenged their deactivation from the app over alleged abuse and the platforms’ refusal to explain how rides were assigned and fares set.

A case concerning a penalty for failing to report capital gains tax.

Authors alleged that the company downloaded their books from unauthorised shadow-library collections and used them to train its models; the court’s ruling addresses fair use only for the reproduction claim brought by these 13 named plaintiffs and this evidentiary record, not the legality of AI training in general, and other claims in the case remain pending.

A collective-management organisation sued the model provider because its chatbot, on a simple prompt, reproduced the lyrics of nine well-known songs.

The sharpest judicial response to date to fabricated citations.

The first case in which a court sanctioned counsel for citing rulings invented by a language model.

A passenger, buying a ticket after the death of a family member, asked the airline’s website chatbot about its bereavement fare.

A photographer alleged that the association LAION had downloaded his photograph from an agency’s website and used it to build a dataset of image-caption pairs later used to train generative models.

A consumer organisation sought an injunction to stop the company from using content publicly posted by social-media users to train its models.

A judgment concerning the SyRI system, through which the administration linked tax, insurance, and social-benefit records to flag individuals for investigation of benefit fraud.

The applicant sought registration of an image, stating on the application that it had been generated autonomously by a system he had built, without creative human input, naming the machine as author and himself as the rights holder by virtue of owning the system.

A legal-database publisher sued the developer of a case-law search tool who had used the publisher’s editorial headnotes to build his training data.

A customer was refused a mobile-phone contract following an automated assessment of her creditworthiness.

The Court’s first ruling on Article 22 GDPR.

A case for judicial review of an appeals tribunal’s decision in an immigration matter.

A family-law case concerning a father’s contact with children residing in China.

The authority announced a fine of EUR 824,990,000 on Uber for taking fully automated decisions about drivers, whose accounts were temporarily or permanently deactivated without human assessment on suspected fraud or low customer ratings between 2018 and 2022, and for insufficiently informing drivers about those decisions.

The Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Division 2) heard the Minister’s application for costs after the dismissal of a judicial review application in an immigration case, including costs against the lawyer who prepared the applicant’s documents.

The Supreme Court of India heard an appeal against an order of the High Court of Gujarat, which had upheld a penalty imposed by a customs authority in Surat for allegedly declaring a consignment of natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds in order to pay a lower tariff.

The Garante per la protezione dei dati personali fined a US company operating a generative AI service for conversations with virtual characters, also available to minors, EUR 158,000 for GDPR infringements, following an investigation opened ex officio in November 2024.

The Employment Appeal Tribunal considered at a preliminary hearing whether there were reasonable grounds for an appeal against a judgment of the employment tribunal that struck out the appellant’s claims against four individuals because of his LinkedIn campaign.

The Upper Tribunal, sitting as a three-judge panel, heard five appeals concerning applications under the EU Settlement Scheme, selected from ten appeals with similar features, and in a single decision issued guidance for First-tier Tribunal judges on fraudulent immigration applications.

The Supreme Administrative Court considered the cassation appeal of a local government appeals board, represented by an attorney-at-law (radca prawny), against a judgment of a provincial administrative court allowing a complaint against the refusal to grant a permanent allowance.

The Supreme Administrative Court dismissed a cassation appeal against an order of the Provincial Administrative Court in Bydgoszcz that had rejected the complaint of a deceased applicant’s wife about the inaction of the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) in proceedings for a supporting benefit.

The Supreme Court of India set aside the judgment of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in Mumbai, which admitted a bank’s application to initiate insolvency proceedings against a company that was a corporate debtor, and the judgment of the appellate tribunal (NCLAT), which upheld that ruling.

The Court of Appeal in Wrocław considered appeals by the prosecutor and defence counsel against a judgment of the Regional Court in Konin in a homicide case, amended the judgment by increasing the sentence from 15 to 25 years’ imprisonment and upheld it in the remaining part.

The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal heard an application by the Solicitors Regulation Authority against a Registered Foreign Lawyer, in which the first allegation concerned a conviction for employing a person with no right to work and the second misleading quotations and erroneous citations in a document filed in these proceedings and in a message to the applicant, both prepared using generative AI.

The Provincial Administrative Court in Gorzów Wielkopolski dismissed the company’s complaint in a VAT case, finding that the company was not entitled to the 0% rate for an intra-Community supply of goods or to deduct input tax, because the goods had not reached the customer named on the invoices and the company had not exercised due diligence.

The Provincial Administrative Court in Poznań heard, in simplified proceedings, a complaint about a mayor’s inaction in the matter of disclosing public information.

The Provincial Administrative Court in Kraków dismissed a complaint against a decision refusing to change the usable floor area of two units in the land and building register.

The Supreme Administrative Court rejected a complaint about the length of proceedings before the Provincial Administrative Court in Kraków and noted that the party’s submissions had been produced with generative AI.

The Provincial Administrative Court in Kraków set aside an individual tax ruling on the thermal modernisation relief and noted in passing that the case law quoted in the complaint did not exist as cited, because the judgments under the cited case numbers had been issued on other dates and concerned other matters.