ECLI:NL:GHDHA:2024:711

ChatGPT unverifiable ai derived assertionsno prompt disclosureno supporting evidence

I. Executive Summary

The court noted that the appellant relied on assertions derived from ChatGPT in challenging the valuation, but the appellant did not explain what question was entered into ChatGPT and did not substantiate the assertions. The AI-derived points therefore did not affect the outcome. The appeal was dismissed.

II. Conduct Analysis

A party relied on ChatGPT-derived assertions to support its position in a tax valuation dispute, without disclosing the prompt or providing corroborating evidence.

III. Legal Foundations

Applicable procedural rules and judicial ethics codes.

IV. Key Facts

1) The appellant presented arguments stated to be derived from ChatGPT. 2) The court observed it was unclear what prompt/question had been entered into ChatGPT. 3) The appellant did not support the AI-derived assertions with concrete facts or evidence.

V. Consequences & Sanction

1) The court gave no weight to the ChatGPT-derived assertions. 2) The appeal was dismissed and the lower decision was confirmed.