For the first time, Spain’s judicial system faces disciplinary proceedings over the use of artificial intelligence in drafting a court decision. The focus is on a judge who used ChatGPT to write a civil case ruling without informing fellow members of the judicial panel. This development could impact trust in legal proceedings and prompt a review of regulations governing new technologies in Spanish courts.
The situation came to light when other panel members noticed evidence of ChatGPT interaction in the draft ruling. The judge had left in certain passages that clearly indicated the use of artificial intelligence. Colleagues reported the incident to the court president, who then referred it to the Judicial Council (Consejo General del Poder Judicial, CGPJ), initiating disciplinary proceedings.
Disciplinary authorities’ response
Ricardo Conde, the promoter of the disciplinary proceedings, proposed a 15-day suspension and a €1,000 fine for the judge. This is at the lower end of possible sanctions: by law, suspensions can last up to three years and fines can reach €6,000. According to EL ESPAÑOL, authorities determined that the judge did not merely refine the text but effectively tasked artificial intelligence with preparing the main part of the ruling, which exceeds the permissible use of technology in judicial practice.
During the investigation, it was revealed that the judge uploaded the full case file to ChatGPT, including details about the rejection of evidence. In his correspondence with the AI, he asked to make the text more detailed and legally precise, as well as to clarify specific points related to the exclusion of evidence. ChatGPT’s responses were incorporated into the final document, which allowed colleagues to identify the source.
AI restrictions in courtrooms
The position of disciplinary bodies is unambiguous: judges are not permitted to delegate to artificial intelligence the functions of evaluating evidence, interpreting laws, or substantiating decisions. Even if the final ruling was made by a panel and not by artificial intelligence, the very act of sharing case materials with an external service and using it to prepare documents is deemed a serious violation. According to the commission, the judge neglected his responsibilities and disclosed confidential information, thereby jeopardizing the privacy of judicial proceedings.
This case has sparked debate within the professional community and could lead to stricter rules for the use of AI in the judicial system. According to russpain.com, such incidents could reshape attitudes toward digital tools in government institutions and accelerate the development of new data security standards.
Implications for judicial practice
The use of artificial intelligence in Spanish courts has not previously been regulated by specific rules, creating a legal vacuum. Now, following this incident, internal guidelines are expected to be revised, and restrictions may be imposed on transferring case materials to external services. It is important to note that the disciplinary case is not related to the content of the decision itself, but concerns solely the procedure of its preparation and the protection of information.
The admissibility of using AI in judicial practice is being debated in other European countries as well. For example, a recent case involving appointments at the Spanish Ministry of Finance, which also sparked controversy over transparency and accountability, the reshuffling of key figures in the government prompted a reassessment of management and oversight approaches. Such developments reflect a broader trend toward tightening standards within public administration.
Context and similar cases
In recent years, ethical and safety issues surrounding the use of digital technologies in government institutions have been increasingly discussed in Spain and other EU countries. In 2025, Catalonia dealt with a case where a municipal official used automated systems to prepare official documents, leading to an internal investigation. In 2024, Madrid debated the use of AI in educational institutions, which also raised concerns about personal data protection. These events highlight that digitalization and oversight of new technologies are becoming increasingly relevant for Spanish society and require constant attention from regulators.
