{"meta":{"exportedAt":"2026-11-07T02:53:28.424Z","formatVersion":2,"selection":{"q":"justice","system":"","harm":"","context":"","country":"","role":"","relation":"unknown","evidence":"","year":"2023","response":"","severity":"","verification":"","view":"incidents","sort":"added"},"totalIncidents":2,"coverage":{"cases":2,"countries":1,"languages":2,"unknownLocation":1,"locationPending":0,"unknownLanguage":0,"unknownDate":0,"lawsuits":1,"regulatory":1,"minors":0,"coreRelations":0,"contextualRelations":0,"mixedRelations":0,"unknownRelations":2,"relationPending":0,"relationUnknown":2},"countingNote":"Distinct public cases in this selection. People counts apply within individual cases only; cross-case person overlap has not been resolved. No population incidence estimate.","affectedCountNote":"Interpret person counts with affectedCountStatus and the reported effects. Unquantified zeros are placeholders, not a measured zero.","source":"AI incidents","publisher":"NOPE","url":"https://nope.net/incidents","license":"CC BY 4.0"},"incidents":[{"id":"2023-rome-labour-court-upholds-graphic-designers-dismissal-in-reorganisation-where-remaining-design-work-moved-partly-to-ai-tools","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'La lavoratrice era stata assunta nel marzo 2022'; 'Nel maggio 2023 la società le intimava licenziamento per giustificato motivo oggettivo, motivandolo con una riorganizzazione interna e con la soppressione della posizione lavorativa'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'una graphic designer, assunta nel 2022 da una società di cybersecurity, rimaneva vittima, un anno dopo, di una riorganizzazione interna dell’azienda'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"A cybersecurity company dismissed a graphic designer it had hired in March 2022 in May 2023, citing an internal reorganisation and the suppression of her post to contain costs.","causal_attribution":"The company's stated grounds as recorded in the judgment and relayed by legal press; one origin (the judgment)."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Particolarmente rilevante, poi, è la circostanza relativa all’impiego di strumenti di intelligenza artificiale da parte del responsabile marketing, che consentivano di realizzare contenuti grafici con standard qualitativi adeguati, riducendo tempi e costi'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'l’azienda specificava come le mansioni di graphic design fossero state prima assorbite da altre figure e poi svolte, per le attività residue, anche tramite supporto di strumenti di intelligenza artificiale'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"According to the judgment as reported, the design tasks were first absorbed by other staff and the residual work was then done partly with AI tools, which the marketing manager used to produce graphics of adequate quality at lower cost and in less time.","causal_attribution":"The company's account and the evidence summarised from the judgment by legal press; one origin. The worker disputed that her tasks were eliminated."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'La dipendente impugnava il recesso, sostenendo che la riorganizzazione fosse meramente pretestuosa e che le sue mansioni non fossero state realmente eliminate, ma semplicemente redistribuite ad altri lavoratori'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The worker challenged the dismissal, arguing that the reorganisation was a pretext and that her tasks had been redistributed to other workers rather than eliminated.","causal_attribution":"The worker's case as summarised from the judgment by one outlet; one origin."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'A tale quesito ha risposto il Tribunale di Roma – IV Sezione Lavoro, con la sentenza n. 9135 del 19 novembre 2025'; 'Il giudice capitolino ha ritenuto legittimo il licenziamento di una graphic designer'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"},{"locator":"'Lo ha stabilito il Tribunale di Roma con la sentenza n. 9135 del 19 novembre 2025, che ha riconosciuto legittimo, per “giustificato motivo oggettivo”, il licenziamento di una graphic designer'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"}],"assertion":"The labour section of the Tribunale di Roma, in judgment no. 9135 of 19 November 2025, held the dismissal lawful.","causal_attribution":"The court's ruling as relayed by two outlets; the judgment text was not read; one origin."},{"id":"c5","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'Nella motivazione della sentenza, l’Intelligenza artificiale non viene individuata come causa autonoma del licenziamento, ma come uno degli strumenti utilizzati dall’azienda per rendere più efficiente la propria struttura'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s2"},{"locator":"'L’intelligenza artificiale, sostiene il decidente, è utilizzata dall’azienda come “supporto”, non come causa autonoma'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s3"}],"assertion":"The reports say the court treated AI as one of the tools the company used to make its structure more efficient and not as an autonomous cause of the dismissal.","causal_attribution":"The court's reasoning as relayed by a news outlet and a legal commentary; one origin (the judgment)."}],"effects":[{"label":"graphic designer dismissed in a reorganisation that included AI tools, challenge rejected","claim_id":"c1","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://lentepubblica.it/personale-e-previdenza/lintelligenza-artificiale-puo-causare-un-licenziamento-per-giustificato-motivo/","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-24 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. lentepubblica.it report on the judgment, 2 March 2026; HTTP 200, full text read. The judgment itself was not read.","independence_group":"tribunale-di-roma-judgment-9135-2025"},{"id":"s2","url":"https://tg24.sky.it/economia/2026/02/26/licenziamento-ai-tribunale-legittimo-perche","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-24 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Sky TG24 report, 26 February 2026, which says the decision was reported by the Corriere della Sera; HTTP 200, full text read.","independence_group":"tribunale-di-roma-judgment-9135-2025"},{"id":"s3","url":"https://giustiziainsieme.it/print/articolo_pdf?id=3953","kind":"other","access":"read","language":"it","translation_note":"Read in Italian by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-24 and translated by the research agent (an AI) into English; no human translator or reviewer was involved. Giustizia Insieme commentary by a lawyer on the judgment, 27 April 2026; PDF print version read in full (HTTP 200, text extracted with pdftotext).","independence_group":"tribunale-di-roma-judgment-9135-2025"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The text of judgment no. 9135/2025 and whether it was appealed.","Which AI tools the marketing manager used.","The name of the company and its location within Italy.","How much of the designer's former work the AI tools took over, as against other staff."],"geography":{"basis":"The case was decided by the Tribunale di Roma under Italian dismissal law, and lentepubblica says the worker was employed under the Italian commerce and services collective agreement (CCNL Commercio Terziario), placing the employment and dismissal in Italy. The worker's residence is not stated.","court_countries":["IT"],"event_countries":["IT"],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a consequential-response case: a cybersecurity company dismissed a graphic designer in May 2023 in a reorganisation in which, according to the reported judgment, residual design work was done partly with AI tools, and a Rome labour court upheld the dismissal in judgment 9135/2025 while describing AI as a support and not an autonomous cause. All facts come from legal press reports of the judgment, which was not read.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-24"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"The harm is the employer's dismissal of the designer in a reorganisation that, according to the judgment as reported, included moving residual graphic work partly to AI tools used by the marketing manager to produce graphics at lower cost and time; the court accepted that reorganisation and, according to the reports, described AI as a support and not an autonomous cause. No source says an AI system produced any output about the worker, so the relation is unknown under the consequential-response exemption.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Rome labour court upholds a graphic designer's dismissal in a reorganisation in which her remaining design work was done partly with AI tools","summary":"A graphic designer hired in March 2022 by a cybersecurity company was dismissed in May 2023 for a justified objective reason, which the company gave as an internal reorganisation and the suppression of her post to contain costs during an economic crisis. She challenged the dismissal, arguing that the reorganisation was a pretext and that her tasks had been redistributed to other workers, not eliminated. According to legal press reports of the judgment, the company said the graphic-design tasks were first absorbed by other staff and the residual work was then done partly with the support of artificial-intelligence tools, which the marketing manager used to produce graphics of adequate quality at lower cost and in less time. The labour section of the Tribunale di Roma (judgment no. 9135 of 19 November 2025) found a real crisis and reorganisation, no possibility of redeploying her, and upheld the dismissal. The reports say the court treated AI as one of the tools the company used to make its structure more efficient, not as an autonomous cause of the dismissal; a commentary in Giustizia Insieme calls the publicity around a first dismissal caused by AI out of proportion to the ruling. The judgment itself was not read, and whether it was appealed is not reported.","incidentDate":"2023-05-01","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"month","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-02-26","aiSystem":"Unnamed artificial-intelligence tools that, according to the judgment as reported, the company's marketing manager used to produce graphic content after the design post was suppressed","aiProduct":"Unidentified image tool","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm","legal_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"A graphic designer lost her job in a reorganisation in which, according to the reported judgment, remaining design work was done partly with AI tools, and a Rome labour court rejected her challenge.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"disputed","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"exact","affectedCountEvidence":"The dismissed graphic designer, described in all three sources. No other dismissal is described.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"IT","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"lawsuit_dismissed","outcomeStatus":"unknown","primarySourceUrl":"https://lentepubblica.it/personale-e-previdenza/lintelligenza-artificiale-puo-causare-un-licenziamento-per-giustificato-motivo/","primarySourceLabel":"lentepubblica.it, 2 March 2026: Rome labour court judgment 9135/2025 on dismissal and artificial intelligence","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-24T03:16:41.726766+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-24T03:16:41.726766+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["dismissal","workplace-ai","labour-court","italy","consequential-response"]},{"id":"2023-asturias-court-security-guard-dismissal-unfair-after-switch-to-ai-camera-surveillance","caseFacts":{"claims":[{"id":"c1","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'La vigilancia presencial permanente dio paso a un sistema de cámaras con inteligencia artificial, rondas itinerantes y respuesta a alarmas'; 'Duro Felguera contrató el nuevo servicio con Securitas el 1 de agosto de 2023'; 'Securitas sustituyó el 95% del sistema anterior, instaló nuevas cámaras e incorporó cámaras con IA para el análisis de vídeo'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"From 1 August 2023 Duro Felguera replaced the continuous on-site guarding provided by Protectum with a Securitas service that combined cameras with artificial intelligence for video analysis, roving patrols and alarm response, according to La Razón's account of the judgment.","causal_attribution":"La Razón's account of the proven facts of the judgment; the judgment was not inspected."},{"id":"c2","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'dejó a los vigilantes de la anterior contrata fuera del nuevo contrato'; 'que había extinguido el contrato del empleado el 31 de julio de 2023'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The guards of the outgoing contract were left out of the new contract, and Protectum ended the claimant guard's employment on 31 July 2023.","causal_attribution":"La Razón's account of the case."},{"id":"c3","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'La sentencia 1385/2024 del Tribunal Superior de Justicia de Asturias, fechada el 29 de julio de 2024'; 'la nueva adjudicataria quedó absuelta porque el sistema de rondas y vigilancia electrónica era diferente'; 'El despido, sin embargo, fue declarado improcedente'; 'El fallo le reconoció 30.672,72 euros por la extinción del contrato'; 'a razón de 58,76 euros diarios'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"The High Court of Justice of Asturias (judgment 1385/2024, 29 July 2024) absolved Securitas of taking on the guard because the new service differed from the old, declared the dismissal unfair and ordered Protectum to pay €30,672.72 plus processing wages at €58.76 a day.","causal_attribution":"La Razón's account of the judgment."},{"id":"c4","status":"reported","evidence":[{"locator":"'aunque siguió habiendo intervención humana'; 'La presencia de esa tecnología formaba parte de la reorganización acreditada, pero no convirtió el despido en procedente'; 'El tribunal señala que el nuevo contrato era más barato'","relation":"supports","source_id":"s1"}],"assertion":"La Razón states that human intervention continued in the new service and that the presence of AI was part of the established reorganisation without making the dismissal lawful; the court also noted that the new contract was cheaper.","causal_attribution":"La Razón's analysis and its account of the judgment; this limits how far the job loss can be attributed to AI."}],"effects":[{"label":"a security guard lost his job when the client replaced continuous on-site guarding with a remote-monitoring service that included AI video-analysis cameras and roving patrols","claim_id":"c2","direction":"negative"}],"sources":[{"id":"s1","url":"https://www.larazon.es/tecnologia-consumo/inteligencia-artificial/justicia-avala-empresa-reemplace-sus-vigilantes-fisicos-camaras-automatizadas-inteligencia-artificial-mantener-su-plantilla_202610096ac8c68ffb06971aadff1a69.html","kind":"news_report","access":"read","language":"es","translation_note":"Read in full in Spanish by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-12 (HTTP 200); the English assertions are the agent's translation and no human translator reviewed them. The article reports the content of TSJ Asturias judgment 1385/2024, which was not itself inspected.","independence_group":"larazon-tsj-asturias-1385-2024-account"}],"version":1,"ai_roles":["institutional_use"],"contexts":["work","justice"],"unknowns":["The location of the guarded installations and how many guards of the outgoing contract lost their jobs.","What the AI cameras analysed and how much of the reduction in on-site guarding they accounted for, as against roving patrols and remote operators.","Whether an appeal for the unification of doctrine was lodged and whether the compensation has been paid.","The text of judgment 1385/2024, which was not inspected."],"geography":{"basis":"The case was decided by the Gijón labour court and the High Court of Justice of Asturias (La Razón). The article does not state where Duro Felguera's guarded installations are, so no event country is recorded from the court's seat; the guard's residence is not stated.","court_countries":["ES"],"event_countries":[],"affected_person_countries":[]},"publication":{"basis":"Published as a consequential-response case: according to La Razón's account of the judgment, a guard's employment ended when the client replaced on-site guarding with a service built on AI video-analysis cameras, and the High Court of Justice of Asturias declared the dismissal unfair. The AI connection and the ruling are reported from one newspaper account; the guard is a private person and is not named.","reviewed_on":"2026-10-12"},"ai_involvement":{"basis":"La Razón attributes the harm to a client's decision to adopt a security service that included cameras with AI for video analysis. La Razón, describing the proven facts of the judgment, reports that continuous on-site guarding gave way to a system of cameras with artificial intelligence for video analysis, roving patrols and alarm response, and that the guards of the outgoing contract were left out. It also reports that human guards still intervened and that the new contract was cheaper, so the AI cameras are one part of the reorganisation that ended the post. As La Razón reports it, the court's reasoning turned on the changed identity of the service (roving patrols and electronic surveillance, a 95% equipment renewal, a cheaper contract), and the AI cameras appear in its proven facts as one element of that renewal. No source says an AI system produced any output about the guard, so the relation is unknown under the consequential-response exemption.","status":"reported"},"person_relations":["unknown"]},"name":"Asturias court rules a security guard's 2023 dismissal unfair after a client replaced on-site guarding with AI cameras and patrols, La Razón reports","summary":"According to La Razón's account of a July 2024 judgment of the High Court of Justice of Asturias, Duro Felguera replaced the continuous on-site guarding provided by the contractor Protectum with a Securitas service that, from 1 August 2023, combined cameras with artificial intelligence for video analysis, roving patrols and alarm response. The guards of the outgoing contract were left out of the new one. Protectum ended a guard's employment on 31 July 2023. The court held that Securitas did not have to take him on because the new service was different, declared the dismissal unfair and ordered Protectum to pay him €30,672.72 in compensation plus processing wages. La Razón notes that human guards still intervened in the new service and that the presence of AI was part of the reorganisation without making the dismissal lawful.","incidentDate":"2023-07-31","incidentKind":"single_event","incidentDatePrecision":"day","exposurePattern":"unknown","reportedDate":"2026-10-09","aiSystem":"Cameras with artificial intelligence for video analysis, installed by Securitas as part of a remote-monitoring, roving-patrol and alarm-response service that replaced continuous on-site guarding; no product is named","aiProduct":"Unidentified AI video-analysis system","severity":"medium","verificationStatus":"credible","harmCategories":[],"harmOutcomes":["professional_harm"],"harmOutcomeSummary":"According to La Razón's account of the judgment, the guard lost his job when the client replaced continuous on-site guarding with a service built on AI video-analysis cameras, roving patrols and alarm response; the court declared the dismissal unfair and awarded him €30,672.72 plus processing wages against his former employer. Other guards of the outgoing contract were also left out; their outcomes are not reported.","frameworkFacets":[],"causationStatus":"alleged","participantUsersAffectedMin":0,"otherPeopleHarmedMin":1,"affectedCountStatus":"documented_minimum","affectedCountEvidence":"One counted: the guard whose dismissal the court ruled on. La Razón says the guards (plural) of the previous contract were left out of the new contract but gives no number and does not report whether the others lost their jobs, so only the claimant is counted, as a documented minimum.","victimAgeRange":"adult","jurisdiction":"ES","platformType":"other","outcomeType":"regulatory_action","outcomeStatus":"resolved","primarySourceUrl":"https://www.larazon.es/tecnologia-consumo/inteligencia-artificial/justicia-avala-empresa-reemplace-sus-vigilantes-fisicos-camaras-automatizadas-inteligencia-artificial-mantener-su-plantilla_202610096ac8c68ffb06971aadff1a69.html","primarySourceLabel":"La Razón, 9 October 2026: report on a High Court of Justice of Asturias judgment on guards replaced by AI cameras","firstPublishedAt":"2026-10-12T03:17:24.169189+00:00","updatedAt":"2026-10-12T03:17:24.169189+00:00","scopeVersion":"facts-v3","tags":["dismissal","workplace-ai","security-guards","video-analytics","labour-court","unfair-dismissal","consequential-response"]}]}