Straipsnyje nagrinėjamas didėjantis dirbtinio intelekto vaidmuo ginčų sprendimo procese, daugiausia dėmesio skiriant tam, kaip jis transformuoja tradicinius teisinius procesus. Automatizuodamas tokias užduotis kaip teisiniai tyrimai, bylų baigties prognozavimas ir net sprendimų priėmimas, dirbtinis intelektas vis plačiau integruojamas į teisminius procesus ir su jais susijusią veiklą. Straipsnyje analizuojama tiek galima nauda – didesnis efektyvumas, mažesnės sąnaudos ir geresnė prieiga prie teisingumo, tiek kylantys iššūkiai, įskaitant susirūpinimą dėl teisingumo, skaidrumo ir atskaitomybės užtikrinimo. Taip pat aptariami etiniai ir teisiniai padariniai, susiję su žmogaus sprendimų priėmimo funkcijų perdavimu algoritmams, keliant svarbius diskriminacijos, šališkumo ir reguliavimo sistemų poreikio klausimus. Straipsnio tikslas – suteikti išsamų supratimą apie dirbtinio intelekto poveikį ginčams spręsti ir pateikti įžvalgų, kaip teisės specialistai bei politikos formuotojai gali prisitaikyti prie kintamos teisingumo sistemos aplinkos.
Legal acts
Europos Sąjungos pagrindinių teisių chartija (2000). Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys, 2012, C 326, 391–407.
Lietuvos Respublikos teismų įstatymas. 1994 m. gegužės 31 d. Nr. I-480. Valstybės žinios, 1994-06-17, Nr. 46-851.
Lietuvos Respublikos civilinio proceso kodeksas. Valstybės žinios, 2002-04-06, Nr. 36-1340.
Regulation (EU) No 1896/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 12 December 2006 creating a European order for payment procedure. OJ L 399, 2006, p. 1–32.
Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 June 2024 laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence and amending Regulations (EC) No 300/2008, (EU) No 167/2013, (EU) No 168/2013, (EU) 2018/858, (EU) 2018/1139 and (EU) 2019/2144 and Directives 2014/90/EU, (EU) 2016/797 and (EU) 2020/1828. OJ L, 2024/1689, p. 1–144.
Tarptautinis pilietinių ir politinių teisių paktas (1966). Valstybės žinios, 2002, 77-3288.
Special literature
ABBOTT, Ryan (2020). Putting the Artificial Intelligence in Alternative Dispute Resolution: How AI Rules Will Become ADR Rules. Amicus Curiae (Series 2), 4(3), 685–706 [online]. https://doi.org/10.14296/ac.v4i3.5627
ALESSA, Hibah (2022). The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Online Dispute Resolution: A Brief and Critical Overview. Information & Communications Technology Law, 31(3), 319–342[online]. https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2022.2088060
ASHLEY, Kevin (2017). Artificial Intelligence and Legal Analytics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BARNETT, Jeremy; TRELEAVEN, Philip (2018). Algorithmic Dispute Resolution – The Automation of Professional Dispute Resolution Using AI and Blockchain Technologies. The Computer Journal, 61(3), 399–408. https://doi.org/10.1093/comjnl/bxx103
BARTKUS, Jurgis (2023). AI v. Arbitrator: How can the Exclusion of Evidence Increase the Appointments of the Arbitrators? Access to Justice in Eastern Europe, 6(1), 111–124 [online]. https://doi.org/10.33327/AJEE-18-6.1-a000114
BERUASHVILI, Magda (2025). The Capabilities and Challenges of Artificial Intelligence in the Justice System. Law And World, 11(3), 148–159 [online]. https://orcid.org/0009-0007-5002-7622
BLACK, Nicole (2025-01-24). Access to Justice 2.0: How AI-powered Software Can Bridge the Gap [online]. https://www.americanbar.org/groups/journal/articles/2025/access-to-justice-how-ai-powered-software-can-bridge-the-gap/
CARNAT, Irina (2024). Addressing the Risks of Generative AI for the Judiciary: The Accountability Framework(s) under the EU AI Act. Computer Law & Security Review, 55 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2024.106067
CHUNG, Yongkyun (2020). ‘Artificial Intelligence’ Acceptability in Online Dispute Resolution: A Comparison Study of Korean Age Groups. Journal of Arbitration Studies, 30(3), 95–113.
DEEKS, Ashley (2019). The Judicial Demand for Explainable Artificial Intelligence. Columbia Law Review, 119(7), 1829–1850.
DONATI, Filippo (2025-12-01). The Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems: Ethics and Efficiency [online]. https://www.julia-project.eu/sites/default/files/2025-12/DONATI_JuLIA_Use%20of%20AI%20in%20Judicial%20Systems.pdf
ERMAKOVA, Elena and FROLOVA, Evgenia. Using Artificial Intelligence in Dispute Resolution. In: INSHAKOVA, Agnessa and FROLOVA, Evgenia (eds.) (2022). Smart Technologies for the Digitisation of Industry: Entrepreneurial Environment. Singapore: Springer.
ESPAÑOL, Guio and & KOENIG, Pascal (2025). Regulatory Sandboxes for AI in The Majority World: A Learning-Centric Approach to Legal Adaptation. Cambridge Forum on AI: Law and Governance, 1, 1–20 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1017/cfl.2025.10015
GAUBIENĖ, Neringa (2024). Can Artificial Intelligence Engage in the Practice of Law as the Art of Good and Justice? Filosofija. Sociologija, 35(2), 54–63 [online]. https://doi.org/10.6001/fil-soc.2024.35.2Priedas.Special-Issue.6
GRAVETT, Willem (2021) The dark side of artificial intelligence: challenges for the legal system [online]. https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/judicial_officers/dark_side_of_artificial_intelligence.html
G’SELL, Florence. AI Judges. In: DIMATTEO, Larry; PONCIBÒ, Cristina et al. (eds.) (2022). The Cambridge Handbook of Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 347–363.
KAZIM, Tatiana; TOMLINSON, Joe (2023). Automation Bias and the Principles of Judicial Review. Judicial Review, 28(1), 9–16 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10854681.2023.2189405.
KOVALEVA, N.N. (2019). Mashinochitaemoe Pravo Kak Mekhanizm Umnogo Regulirovaniia v Oblasti Sviazi. Pravovaia politika i pravovaia zhizn‘, 3, 158–159.
LEGG, Michael and BELL, FELICITY (2019). Artificial Intelligence and The Legal Profession: Becoming the AI-enhanced Lawyer. University of Tasmania Law Review, 38(2), 34–59.
LEVY, Karen; CHASALOW, Kyla; RILEY, Sarah (2021). Algorithms and Decision-Making in the Public Sector. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, 17, 309–334 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-lawsocsci-041221-023808
MALGIERI, Gianclaudio; PASQUALE, Frank (2024). Licensing High-risk Artificial Intelligence: Toward ex ante Justification for a Disruptive Technology. Computer Law & Security Review, 52, 1–18 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105899
MCCARL, Ryan (2022). The Limits of Law and AI. University of Cincinnati Law Review, 90(3), 923–950.
OSTER, Jan (2021). Code is Code and Law is Law – the Law of Digitalization and the Digitalization of Law. International Journal of Law & Information Technology, 29(2), 101–117 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eaab004
TAMOŠIŪNIENĖ, Egidija; TEREBEIZA, Žilvinas ir DORŽINKEVIČ, Artur (2024). The Possibility of Applying Artificial Intelligence in the Delivery of Justice by Courts. Baltic Journal of Law and Politics, 17(1), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.2478/bjlp-2024-0010
TEWARI, Jolly; BOSE, Malobika (2023). History of Artificial Intelligence. Indian Journal of Law and Legal Research, 5(2), 1–15.
QUINTANILLA, Victor; HUGENBERG, Kurt; HAGAN, Margaret et al. (2023). Digital Inequalities and Access to Justice. In: ENGSTROM, David (ed.) Legal Tech and the Future of Civil Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p. 225–250.
RABINOVICH-EINY, Orna; KATSH, Ethan (2021-04-20). Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Dispute Resolution: The Age of AI-DR [online]. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3830033.
SIMSHAW, Drew (2022). Access to A.I. Justice: Avoiding an Inequitable Two-Tiered System of Legal Services. Yale Journal of Law & Technology, 24, 150–226.
SURDE, Harry (2019). Artificial Intelligence and Law: An Overview. Georgia State University Law Review, 35(4), 1305–1337.
VARGHESE, John (2025). Artificial Intelligence Assisted Judicial Processes – A Primer [online]. https://ssrn.com/abstract=5056102.
VAROŠANEC, Ida (2022-11-17). Silence is Golden, or Is It? Trade Secrets versus Transparency in AI Systems [online]. https://digi-con.org/silence-is-golden-or-is-it/
WEITZEL, Paul. (2026). Defining Artificial Intelligence. Wayne Law Review, 71(2), 363–465.
XU, Zichun (2022). Human Judges in the Era of Artificial Intelligence: Challenges and Opportunities. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 36(1), 1025–1045 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1080/08839514.2021.2013652
ZÚÑIGA, Homero Gil; GOYANES, Manuel and DUROTOYE, Timilehin (2023). A Scholarly Definition of Artificial Intelligence (AI): Advancing AI as a Conceptual Framework in Communication Research. Political Communication, 41, 317–334 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2023.2290497
ZHENG, George (2020). China’s Grand Design of People’s Smart Courts. Asian Journal of Law and Society, 7(3), 561–582 [online]. https://doi.org/10.1017/als.2020.20
Case law
Mata v. Avianca, Inc., 678 F.Supp.3d 443 (S.D.N.Y. 2023).
Other sources
American Bar Association, Standing Committee on Ethics and Professional Responsibility. (2024). Formal Opinion 512: Generative artificial intelligence tools. Chicago, IL: American Bar Association.
Bloomberg Law (n.d.) Legal AI Designed for Decisions [online]. https://pro.bloomberglaw.com/products/ai-and-bloomberg-law/
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (2025). CCBE guide on the use of generative AI by lawyers. Brussels, Belgium: CCBE.
Council of Bars and Law Societies of Europe (2022). Guide on the use of artificial intelligence-based tools by lawyers and law firms in the EU (AI4Lawyers). Brussels, Belgium: CCBE.
Estonia’s AI Judge Reimagines Justice (2025). Innovation Library [online]. https://innovationlibrary.com/articles/estonia-is-asking-can-justice-come-from-code-not-a-courtroom
European Commission for the Efficiency of Justice (CEPEJ). 2018. European Ethical Charter on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial Systems and Their Environment. Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 3-4 December 2018.
GRAVETT, Willem (2021). The dark side of artificial intelligence: challenges for the legal system [online]. https://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/benchbks/judicial_officers/dark_side_of_artificial_intelligence.html
Humanoid Liability Law (2025-12-09) Legal AI Hallucinations: Cases, Ethics Rules, and Risk Management [online]. https://humanoidliabilitylaw.com/resources/legal-ai-hallucinations/
LinkedIn (2026-02-12). UNESCO’s Guidelines for the Use of AI in Courts and Tribunals [LinkedIn post]. https://www.linkedin.com/posts/unesco_unescos-guidelines-for-the-use-of-ai-in-activity-7416478701556727809-aUIr/
The National Archives (n.d.) Magna Carta, 1215 [online]. https://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/magna-carta/british-library-magna-carta-1215-runnymede/
The Relationship between Formal and Informal Justice: the Courts and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Statement of the European Law Institute and of the European Network of Councils for the Judiciary) (n.d.) European Law Institute [online]. https://www.europeanlawinstitute.eu/fileadmin/user_upload/p_eli/Publications/ADR_Statement.pdf
UNESCO, Guidelines for the Use of AI Systems in Courts and Tribunals (Paris, UNESCO 2025).
UN Special Rapporteur on the Independence of Judges and Lawyers, AI in Judicial Systems: Promises and Pitfalls, A/80/169 (2025).
Šis darbas apsaugotas Creative Commons priskyrimo 4.0 viešąja licencija.