An AI-powered law firm has secured what is believed to be the first successful court case in England in which artificial intelligence handled the legal work leading up to trial.
An artificial intelligence law firm has won a case in an English court, marking what is believed to be the first successful trial in which AI carried out the legal preparation work.
Freelance HR consultant Tamires Camal Taquidir used AI-powered legal service Garfield AI to pursue an unpaid debt of £7,000 after paying around £400 for assistance.
The platform, which was authorised by the Solicitors Regulation Authority in April 2025, handled the legal work before trial, including preparing witness statements and court documents.
Garfield AI was founded to help individuals and small businesses pursue claims that might otherwise be abandoned because of the cost of legal action.
Its co-founder, Philip Young, described the ruling as a significant moment for access to justice.
He said it was a “landmark moment” and argued that many small businesses have historically been forced to write off debts because pursuing them through the courts was too expensive.
The case was heard at Wandsworth County Court on May 14.
Garfield AI prepared four witness statements and assembled the trial bundle after the defendant responded with a counterclaim and instructed solicitors.
While the AI handled the legal preparation, a human barrister was still required to represent the claimant in court.
The three-hour hearing ultimately ended in Taquidir’s favour, with the court awarding her the money owed.
Taquidir said: “I was owed money for work I had done, but it felt like the process of recovering it could be too stressful, expensive and time-consuming. Garfield made it possible for me to pursue the claim and keep going.
“When the counterclaim was brought, it was intended to intimidate me, but I knew I had accessible, cost-effective and competent support. I’m delighted by the result.”
Barrister Dominic Li, who represented Taquidir at trial, praised the preparation provided by the AI system.
He said: “Garfield presented the client’s case clearly and efficiently.”
However, he stressed that “the advocacy at trial remained essential and a fundamentally human exercise”.
The case comes at a time when AI is increasingly being adopted across the legal sector, despite concerns over reliability.
Last month, international law firm Pinsent Masons referred itself to the Solicitors Regulation Authority after misleading a court on two occasions using information generated by an internal AI system.
The Garfield ruling is likely to fuel further debate over the role artificial intelligence could play in expanding access to legal services while maintaining professional standards and human oversight.
HR consultant wins court case using AI lawyer in English legal first
