Brazil's Enter case and the governance of AI-powered legal services

On 7 Oct. 2026, the São Paulo Bar Association filed a public civil action against Talisman AI Ltda., better known as Enter, Latin America's first "artificial intelligence unicorn." 

The case, filed before the 4th Federal Civil Court of São Paulo, targets a platform built for mass litigation: it reads case files, assesses claims, suggests strategy and drafts pleadings. The Rio de Janeiro Bar has since asked to join.

Mass litigation is a structural feature of justice in Brazil: courts ended 2025 with 75.5 million pending cases after receiving a record 40.9 million new ones that year, according to the National Council of Justice. LATAM alone faces more than 120,000 passenger lawsuits a year, according to figures cited in the complaint. Yet the practice of law is tightly closed: only law graduates who pass the Bar examination and register with the OAB may practice. Automating mass litigation collides head-on with that reserve.

Enter answers that its software assists lawyers rather than replacing them, and that strategy, review, signature and filing remain with the attorneys retained by its corporate clients. Its own job postings, however, describe a "Legal Strategy" area responsible for building legal strategies and playbooks, as Veja reported in September 2026. 

Who, legally, makes the strategic call is at the heart of the dispute.

It would be easy to read this as a turf war. The real question is whether the human in an automated workflow still exercises independent judgment or simply signs what the machine wrote.

From presence to control

The Brazilian Bar Association's posture has hardened. After nonbinding guidance on generative AI in 2024, its Federal Council unanimously authorized lawsuits in August 2026 against AI companies performing acts reserved for lawyers.