Tribunal de Justiça do Estado do Paraná, 9ª Câmara Cível
Agravo interno in processo 0108267-74.2025.8.16.0000, TJ/PR, 9ª Câmara Cível
Sanctioned · 15 May 2026
What was fabricated
A judicial precedent cited to the court and not found in the issuing authority's own repository. The filing cited 'AgInt no REsp 1.988.733/SP', attributed to minister Moura Ribeiro of the Superior Tribunal de Justiça (julgado 20/03/2023, DJe 22/03/2023). THE COURT USES TWO FORMULATIONS, BOTH IN ITS OWN REASONING, AND THEY ARE LINKED: in the analysis, the authority 'não foi localizada no repositório oficial junto ao site do STJ, o que induz à conclusão de ter sido “confeccionada” por inteligência artificial'; in the conclusion on má-fé, the court rests the finding on 'a citação de precedente jurisprudencial inexistente'. The court records that the appellant was given the chance to show the precedent existed and instead argued that 'a ausência de localização do precedente pela parte adversa não implica, automaticamente, em sua inexistência'. The opposing party's own earlier phrase 'precedente inexistente' is the party's argument, not the court's. THE REGISTER SHOULD NOT STATE MORE THAN THE COURT DID: the court reasoned from non-location in the STJ's official repository to non-existence, and proceeded on the basis that the precedent does not exist.
What happened as a result
Acordão of 15 May 2026, TJ/PR 9ª Câmara Cível, relator Des. Luis Sérgio Swiech, BY UNANIMOUS VOTE: the court knew of and denied the agravo interno, applied a fine for litigância de má-fé, and ordered an ofício issued to the OAB/PR. The fine is fixed in the body of the judgment: 'fixo em 2% (dois por cento) sobre o valor atualizado da causa de origem', 'nos termos do artigo 81, do CPC'. NEITHER THE VALUE OF THE CAUSE NOR ANY AMOUNT IN REAIS APPEARS ANYWHERE IN THE DOCUMENT AS THE COURT'S OWN FIGURE (the only R$ figure in the document sits inside a quoted precedent from another chamber, about a different party's income, and is unrelated). The referral is 'a expedição de ofício à Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil – Seção do Paraná' to examine 'eventual infração disciplinar' under 'artigo 34, XIV, do Estatuto da Advocacia' — A REFERRAL FOR ASSESSMENT, NOT A COMPLETED DISCIPLINARY CONSEQUENCE, AND IT IS NOT RELIED ON. The appellant was acting 'em causa própria' — he was both the party and his own lawyer — and the fine falls on him as a party while the conduct question went to the bar.
Sources
- https://arq.migalhas.com.br/arquivos/2026/6/0480FF4A55ACBD_TJPRvema-feemultaadvogadoporju.pdf
- https://www.migalhas.com.br/quentes/459252/tj-pr-ve-ma-fe-e-multa-advogado-por-julgado-confeccionado-por-ia
Every incident is confirmed against at least one reputable source (mainstream news, legal/official, or the organisation itself). Nothing unverifiable is listed. Accuracy is non-negotiable — Ukweli is a truth product.