DEFEND THIS
Litigation is broken.
Businesses facing claims spend tens of thousands of pounds,
and hundreds of hours, before a single document is filed.
The cost is not just financial. Management time disappears into phone calls, emails, and meetings with lawyers who are still trying to work out what happened.
DefendThis is different. Founded by three barristers
with a combined thirty-five years at the Bar.
Our platform gathers facts, cross-references answers against documents, drafts defences and letters to the other side, ready for solicitor review.
Write better documents. Save hundreds of hours of lawyer time.
DefendThis
DefendThis Limited · Company no. 17111205 · 71-75 Shelton Street, Covent Garden, London, WC2H 9JQ
A claim against you has landed.
DefendThis helps you respond quickly, more accurately and at lower cost.

Artificial intelligence and legislative changes mean that organisations will face an increasing volume of lengthy claims. Too often, expensive lawyers advise a commercial settlement, because fighting a claim is more expensive than paying someone off, even when they do not have a good case.

DefendThis is an AI-powered legal defence platform created by ranked barristers. It helps businesses respond to employment, civil and commercial claims more accurately and more efficiently. You upload your documents. Leonidas reads them, asks targeted questions of the people with knowledge of the facts, and produces a professionally drafted defence.

01 / Products
How it works
Leonidas: Defence drafter
02 / Organisations
Who it is for
03 / Examples
04 / More
Public Sector

Responding to civil and commercial claims. Faster and better.

NHS trusts, local authorities, police forces and universities (to name but a few) face a growing volume of civil and commercial claims. In employment tribunals alone, 42,000 single claims were received in 2024/25. The burden is increasing: the Employment Rights Act 2025 reduces qualifying periods for key rights and widens the scope of claims that employers must answer. The British Chambers of Commerce puts the average employer cost of defending one at £8,500. For many cases it is much more. For a public body handling thirty or forty claims a year, that is a quarter of a million pounds before a hearing is listed.

The Problem
Five problems that public sector legal teams face every day.
01
Cost. External solicitors charge by the hour. A single defended claim costs thousands of pounds in legal fees before the hearing is listed. Multiply that across dozens of claims a year and the annual spend is significant, often with no predictability.
02
Speed. Instructing external counsel takes time. Internal approvals, panel firm selection, initial meetings, document gathering. The 28-day deadline for filing a response does not wait for procurement processes. Claims are often late to be actioned because the machinery of instruction is too slow.
03
Consistency. Different solicitors on different panel firms produce work of different quality. There is no standardised approach to how a Grounds of Resistance is structured, how the evidence is tested, or how the account is taken. The result is variable quality across the organisation's caseload.
04
Dependence on external panels. Most public bodies rely entirely on external firms for employment litigation. That creates a dependency that is expensive to maintain and difficult to manage. The knowledge of how to prepare a response sits outside the organisation, not inside it.
05
Getting instructions. The hardest part of defending any claim is extracting a clear, complete, and honest account from the people who were involved. In large organisations, the relevant managers are busy, spread across sites, and often reluctant. The process of taking instructions is slow. DefendThis makes it fast, guided, and thorough.
The Product
Defences and letters of response, built by specialist barristers. Delivered by AI.

DefendThis takes the core task of responding to civil and commercial claims and runs it through AI. It does not stop at a single document. The platform produces a Grounds of Resistance or a letter of response, witness statements, a counter schedule of loss, a list of issues, and draft instructions to counsel.

The AI cross-references each witness's account against the uploaded documents. Where the account conflicts with the paperwork, it presses for an explanation. Where evidence is missing, it says so. The output is a better set of case documents than most solicitors produce from a first conference, and it takes hours rather than weeks.

The Workflow
No long phone calls. No endless emails with internal witnesses.

Defending a claim in a large organisation is slow. HR or in-house legal chases managers for their account. Managers are busy, spread across sites, unclear about what is needed. Emails go back and forth. Phone calls are scheduled and rescheduled. Weeks pass. DefendThis replaces that process.

01
Claim lands. The claim arrives. An ET1, a letter before action, or a pre-action protocol letter. The clock starts.
02
Core user uploads the claim. HR or in-house legal uploads the claim to the DefendThis dashboard. The system reads it and identifies every factual allegation.
03
Identify who has the facts. DefendThis and the core user work out which managers, decision-makers, and witnesses hold the relevant knowledge.
04
DefendThis generates links. Each person receives a personal link to a questionnaire. No app to install. No training needed.
05
Managers answer questions and upload evidence. The system asks binary questions and probes the important details. It asks for documents. It tests the account against what has already been uploaded. Managers do it from their desk, in their own time.
06
Documents are produced. The core user receives a drafted Grounds of Resistance or letter of response, witness statements, a counter schedule of loss, a list of issues, and draft instructions to counsel.
07
Core user reviews and sends. The core user reviews, amends, and approves the documents. They can file with the tribunal or send the letter of response directly.
08
Optional solicitor review. If they choose, the core user sends the complete file to panel solicitors for review at a substantially reduced cost. The preparation is done. The solicitor is reviewing, not discovering.
The process replicates how a barrister proofs a witness, without the phone call, the conference, or the diary slot. Managers see binary questions, follow-up prompts, and evidence upload requests. No chasing. No ambiguity.
For your in-house team
Free your lawyers to focus on what matters.

The preparation work that currently absorbs your in-house team's time is done by the platform. Your lawyers receive a draft defence or letter of response, witness statements, a counter schedule, a list of issues, draft instructions to counsel, and an indexed document bundle. The documents are more accurate than those produced by the conventional process, because every factual assertion has been tested against the uploaded evidence before the draft is produced.

Your in-house team reviews, amends, and files. The hours they currently spend chasing witnesses, collating documents, and drafting from incomplete notes are returned to them for strategic work.

Bespoke Products
We build what your organisation needs.

Beyond the standard response workflow, DefendThis builds bespoke products for public sector clients. Witness statement generators that take instructions from individual witnesses and produce drafted statements ready for legal review. Counter schedule of loss tools that calculate and present the respondent's position on remedy. Case management systems that track every claim across your organisation from receipt to disposal.

Each product uses the same AI and the same barrister-designed protocols. They are built to your specification and sit within the DefendThis dashboard your team already uses.

Who This Is For
Any public body that faces civil or commercial claims.
NHS trusts and health bodies
Multiple sites, high claim volumes, HR teams stretched thin. External legal spend that runs into six figures a year and is difficult to predict.
Local authorities
Large, diverse workforces. Restructuring programmes that generate employment, contractual, and discrimination claims. Legal services departments under constant budget pressure.
Police forces
Claims that overlap with misconduct proceedings and involve sensitive operational material. Internal processes are complex. The need for consistent, accurate response preparation is acute.
Universities
Academic and professional staff disputes that in-house legal teams, often small relative to the institution, must manage alongside everything else.
Corporates

AI platform for responding to employment, civil and commercial claims.

Large organisations face a steady flow of claims. Employment tribunal claims, commercial disputes over contracts and non-payment, civil claims from customers, suppliers and neighbours. Each one triggers the same machinery. Instruct external solicitors. Gather the facts from the people inside the business. Draft the response. File. Repeat. The cost is significant and largely uncontrolled. For organisations defending dozens of claims a year across different areas of law, the annual spend runs well into six figures. DefendThis prepares the first draft internally, across every type of claim, faster and at lower cost than any external firm.

The Proposition
Better documents. Less time. Your lawyers focused on strategy.

DefendThis is built as a bespoke platform for each corporate client. The AI is loaded with your organisation's own policies, contracts, and internal procedures, across every area where claims arise. Your employment policies, your supplier contracts, your terms of business, your consumer-facing terms and conditions. When the system questions a manager, it cross-references their account against your documents, not generic templates.

The documents produced are more accurate than those from the conventional process. Every factual assertion is tested against the uploaded evidence before a draft is generated. Inconsistencies are identified and resolved at the fact-gathering stage, not discovered by counsel the week before the hearing.

Your in-house team receives a complete case file, whatever the claim type. For a tribunal claim, that is a Grounds of Resistance, witness statements, a counter schedule of loss, a list of issues, and draft instructions to counsel. For a civil or commercial claim, a CPR-compliant defence, witness statements, a schedule of disputed facts, and draft instructions. They review and refine rather than draft from scratch.

Two benefits that compound. First, each document is more accurate because the AI tests every answer against the evidence before drafting. Second, your in-house lawyers spend their time reviewing and advising, not chasing witnesses and assembling facts.
The Workflow
No long phone calls. No endless emails with internal witnesses.

In most large organisations, defending a claim starts with chasing. In-house legal chases HR. HR chases the manager who made the decision. The manager is in a different office, or a different country, and does not know what information is needed. Weeks of emails produce an incomplete account. DefendThis replaces that.

01
Claim lands. The claim arrives. An ET1, a letter before action, or a pre-action protocol letter. The clock starts.
02
Core user uploads the claim. In-house legal or HR uploads the claim to the DefendThis dashboard. The system reads it and identifies every factual allegation.
03
Identify who has the facts. The core user and DefendThis work out which people in the organisation hold the relevant knowledge.
04
DefendThis generates links. Each person receives a personal link. No app. No training.
05
Managers answer and upload. Binary questions. Follow-up prompts on the points that matter. Document upload requests. The system tests each answer against the evidence already on file. Managers do it at their desk.
06
Documents are produced. The core user receives a drafted Grounds of Resistance or letter of response, witness statements, a counter schedule of loss, a list of issues, and draft instructions to counsel.
07
Core user reviews and sends. The core user reviews, amends, and approves the documents. They can file with the tribunal or send the letter of response directly.
08
Optional solicitor review. If they choose, the core user sends the complete file to panel solicitors for review at a substantially reduced cost. The preparation is done. The solicitor is reviewing, not discovering.
The manager sees binary questions, follow-up prompts, and document upload requests. No long phone calls. No solicitors billing by the hour to find out what happened. The manager gives instructions once, properly, and the system does the rest.
The Platform
A dashboard for your legal team. Logins for your managers.

The corporate platform includes a case management dashboard. Your in-house legal team or HR director sees every active claim across the organisation in one place: claim type, status, deadline, and the complete case file when it is ready.

Your in-house legal team creates cases and assigns them to the people who hold the facts. Each person receives a link and completes their part independently. The dashboard tracks who has responded and who has not.

The Product
Trained on your policies. Drafting to your standard.
01
Bespoke configuration. The system is loaded with your policies, standard contract terms, and internal procedures, across every area where claims arise. When it questions a manager, it references your documents by name. When it drafts, it applies your organisation's language and approach.
02
Full case documentation. Grounds of Resistance, CPR-compliant defences, witness statements, counter schedules of loss, schedules of disputed facts, lists of issues, draft instructions to counsel. Whatever the claim type demands, produced from the same evidence base.
03
Multi-user access. The core user creates cases and generates links for managers across the organisation. Each person completes their part independently. The dashboard shows who has responded and who has not.
04
Case management dashboard. Every claim across the organisation in one view. Filter by claim type, by site, by status. Track deadlines. Download the complete case file.
05
Flexible review path. Your in-house team reviews the documents directly. Or sends them to your panel firm with the full file already prepared. The solicitor arrives briefed, not billing discovery time.
06
Every area of law the organisation needs. Employment, civil, and commercial claims from day one. New areas are added as the organisation requires them. Same platform, same dashboard, same configuration of policies and procedures.
Bespoke Products
We build what your organisation needs.

The standard DefendThis platform produces a Grounds of Resistance or a defence to a civil or commercial claim. For corporate clients, we go further. We can build bespoke witness statement generators that take instructions from individual witnesses and produce drafted statements ready for review. We can build counter schedule of loss tools that calculate and present the respondent's position on remedy. We can build case management systems that track every claim across your organisation from receipt to disposal.

Each of these products uses the same AI, the same evidence base, and the same barrister-designed protocols. They are built to your specification and integrated into your DefendThis dashboard.

Commercial Model
One build cost. One annual licence.

The corporate product is delivered as a bespoke build: your policies loaded, your procedures configured, your dashboard set up, your users created. That is a one-off cost. Thereafter, an annual licence fee covers unlimited access to the platform, ongoing AI updates, and support.

No per-claim charges, save for minimal token costs. No hourly billing. A fixed, predictable cost for claim response preparation across the organisation.

Case Study
See how DefendThis handles a real claim.

Maria works for an international audit firm. She brings a claim for failure to make reasonable adjustments based on her mental health conditions, together with a series of grievances. Follow the claim through the platform, step by step.

The Process
Eight stages. Claim to filed response.
StageActionOutput
1£300 fee paidAccess to the platform
2Upload the claim and supporting certificateClaim analysis and deadline confirmation
3Upload contracts, records, correspondenceIndexed bundle with gap analysis
4AI-guided interview: structured questions, plain EnglishFull transcribed account
5AI drafts the responseGrounds of Resistance or letter of response (draft)
6Review and confirm each factual assertionClient-verified response document
7Partner solicitor reviews and filesFiled response
8Ongoing case support as the matter progressesWitness statements, correspondence
Why DefendThis
Faster, cheaper, and more accurate than the conventional process.
01
Speed. A solicitor takes weeks to produce a first draft. DefendThis produces one in days. The 28-day deadline for filing a response does not wait.
02
Simplicity. No office appointments. No callbacks. No explaining the same facts to three different people. You upload, you answer questions, you receive a drafted response. The process is entirely online.
03
Accuracy. The AI cross-references your answers against your documents as you go. It catches inconsistencies before they become problems at tribunal. The response is grounded in the evidence, not in a hurried phone call and a set of incomplete notes.
04
Quality. The output is a response drafted to the standard a ranked employment barrister would expect. Numbered paragraphs. Legal tests applied. Facts separated from submissions. It is better than what many solicitors produce, and costs less than a single hour of their time.
The Interview
An AI that prepares your response the way a barrister would.

The interview follows protocols written by ranked employment barristers. It takes the factual chronology, identifies the decision-makers, establishes the reason for each disputed decision, and then tests. Where your account conflicts with the documents, it does not move on. It asks why. Where a gap in the evidence exists, it asks what happened.

This replicates how a barrister prepares a witness before tribunal. The interview is transcribed and forms the foundation of the drafted response. You confirm each factual assertion individually before the document is finalised.

In conventional practice, a solicitor produces a lengthy document and the client signs it at the end. People verify facts more carefully when they confirm them one at a time, at the outset. DefendThis applies that principle.
Why we are different

Built by barristers. Designed to cut costs, not preserve them.

Most AI legal companies are run by non-lawyers, trying to sell complicated generalist products to law firms. DefendThis is different. It has been founded by three senior barristers, who have encoded their expertise about how courts and tribunals operate into the model. DefendThis provides organisations with a series of simple tools that drastically reduce the amount it costs to defend claims.

Despite hundreds of AI tools being on the market, costs of fighting claims remain enormous. The reason is structural. Firms whose revenue depends on billable hours have little reason to adopt tools that shorten the time spent on a client matter. The AI products marketed at law firms are designed to fit around the billable hour model, not to displace it.

DefendThis is built for the people who pay those bills. It sits with the organisation defending the claim, not the firm representing it. The output is a complete first draft of a defence or witness statement, produced in hours rather than weeks, and at a fraction of the usual costs. Internal lawyers can then check the output, or send a complete set of documents to external firms, saving time and cost.

Insurers

Claims management takes time. We do it quicker.

Insurers are dealing with a triple burden: higher claim volume, higher claim values, and higher claims management costs. Across motor, EL/PL, property damage and general casualty insurance, thousands of claims handlers and loss adjusters incur billions of pounds in the costs of processing and managing liability claims. Every insurance claim is as different as it is similar. Common patterns, but different facts. DefendThis cuts the time it takes to respond.

The Problem
Five pressures on every claims operation.
01
Costs are fixed, or so it seems. Insurers typically spend 15 to 25 per cent of funds on loss adjustment, claims investigation, and general claims management. As pressure on each of these overheads increases, pressure builds on shareholders and policyholders. All of these costs come back to the time spent processing claims. DefendThis cuts that time.
02
Costs are increasing. Service price inflation runs consistently ahead of general inflation, and the fees charged by law firms for their services increase at a yet-higher rate. UK insurers also employ approximately 60,000 in-house and outsourced claims handlers, at a cost of billions shouldered by their policyholders.
03
Complexity. Insured liability disputes used to be simple, before everybody had a camera and recording device in their pocket. Modern liability disputes are more document and data heavy than ever before. That means more time for claims handlers and lawyers just sifting the evidence and working out the facts.
04
Consistency. Most insurers appoint panel firms to manage their litigation, but taking a policy-driven approach to defending claims is still difficult. Individual lawyers and teams drafting defences individually can take remarkably different approaches.
05
Client management. Liability insurance covers most of the adult population, so the insured clients involved in any dispute will come in all shapes and sizes. Insurers spend millions of hours on the phone to their clients, often to get answers to simple, iterative questions.
The Market
A market measured in millions of claims and billions of pounds.
01
Motor. Motor insurers dealt with a record 2.4 million claims in 2024, and paid out £11.7bn. The average claim size rose to more than £5,000 by the end of the year. The technical complexity of electric vehicles is driving repair and damage costs up further.
02
Credit hire. This sub-area of motor is strikingly expensive and subject to marked claim inflation. One law firm estimates approximately 60,000 credit hire claims were issued in the county court in 2023, with an average claim now above £5,000. Thousands more were brought to insurers and settled before court.
03
Low-value claims. High volume, poor value-to-effort ratio. In 2025 nearly a quarter of a million claims were submitted to the Official Injury Claims Portal, all for whiplash claims of less than £5,000. Hundreds of thousands more work their way through the court's specialist processes for low-value injuries in motor, employer's liability and public liability claims.
04
General personal injury. According to the Compensation Recovery Unit, more than 400,000 claims were submitted for benefit recovery in 2025. More than half of those were motor insurance claims.
The Product
DefendThis defends claims. Built by barristers. Delivered by AI.

DefendThis is an AI system, developed by ranked barristers with specialisms in each claims area. It takes the materials of a claim, absorbs them, and works out how to respond.

It produces all the documents required to defend an insured liability claim. A response to a letter of claim, a CPR-compliant Defence, witness statements, counter schedules, Part 18 and Part 35 questions, and draft instructions to counsel.

The AI understands the details of the claim and works out what is needed to respond. It questions the witnesses and cross-references their accounts with uploaded documents. It presses for detail, demands explanations, and probes inconsistencies. Where evidence is missing it says so.

DefendThis produces in minutes what claims handlers and solicitors take weeks, and dozens of billable hours, to produce. With greater consistency, and according to master strategy instructions provided by the insurer client.

The output is the work product of a barrister's first conference and pleadings, delivered in minutes rather than weeks, and to your house standard rather than the individual style of whichever fee-earner happens to pick up the file.
The Workflow
No phone calls. No chasing. No fee-earner discovering the case in week three.

DefendThis is flexible enough to fit the requirements of any insurer or claims handler. At its core, it pulls together the process of gathering and processing evidence. It cuts out the phone calls, emails and endless chasing that bog down the claims management process.

01
Claim is intimated. A letter of claim, or a claim form, lands. The clock starts ticking.
02
Core users upload the claim. Your claims handlers upload the claim to DefendThis and populate basic information. Within minutes of the claim landing, DefendThis reads the claim documents and identifies each distinct factual allegation.
03
Identify who has the facts. DefendThis and your claims handler identify, from the details given, who has to be approached to help with the response. The insured, and any other witnesses.
04
DefendThis reaches out. No need for calls and chasing. DefendThis sends out personal links to each person. No app, no training. Just a link they can use on their browser or phone.
05
Questions and upload. The system asks questions in plain English. It probes the important detail. It leaves nothing out. It asks for documents and supporting evidence. Witnesses can do this in a few minutes of their own time, not just when they are called. If witnesses give conflicting accounts, it probes, and it tells the claims handler.
06
Documents are produced. The claims handler receives the required document. A letter of response, or a Defence, for instance.
07
Review and service. The documents are drafts. The claims handler reviews, amends, and approves them.
08
Solicitor review (optional). Claims handlers can opt to send documents on to their panel lawyers before use. Time is still saved. The lawyers are reviewing, not discovering.
The process replicates a barrister holding a conference with every witness to the dispute, then being briefed to settle the pleadings. Your clients and witnesses see clean, simple, binary questions in an intuitive online system with clear prompts. No chasing. No ambiguity.
Your Panel Firms
DefendThis will not replace your panel firm. It will change the way you work with them.

Instead of spending their time, and your money, wading through a diffuse sea of papers, panel solicitors receive clear, organised, focused documents for review. The fact-finding has been done. Your lawyers can focus on what they do best. Analysis, strategy, and advice.

Bespoke Products
Built around your claims operation, not the other way round.

Every insurer is different. DefendThis is a flexible platform, and can be adapted to suit any organisation, without compromising its core function. Every kind of dispute dealt with by insurers can be accommodated. The same AI and the same barrister-designed rules and protocols work throughout, configured to your house style, your reserving philosophy, and your strategic priorities.

About Us

Built by barristers.

DefendThis is built by expert, experienced barristers who can see that the current system often fails businesses. The founders have spent their careers preparing witnesses, drafting defences, and watching clients spend thousands of pounds on work that a well-trained AI can do faster and more accurately. DefendThis exists because they decided to do something about it.

GB
Founder
Gus Baker

Barrister, Outer Temple Chambers. Called 2015. Ten years' experience in employment law and commercial litigation. Ranked as a Leading Junior in Legal 500 (Tier 4, Employment) and in Chambers and Partners.

Gus designed the DefendThis platform, the AI instruction set, and the interview protocols. He maintains a practice at the Bar while building the company.

"A junior who makes complex arguments with ease, and always comes up with creative solutions. A lateral thinker." Legal 500
"Gus Baker is exceptional; he is really hard-working, gets great results and is fantastic with clients." Chambers and Partners
DG
Founder
David Green

Barrister, 12 King's Bench Walk. Called 2015. Head of the 12KBW employment team. Ranked as a Leading Junior in both Chambers and Partners and Legal 500 for employment law. David's practice spans employment, personal injury, and civil litigation. Contributing editor to Harvey on Industrial Relations and Employment Law, the leading practitioner textbook. Fellow of the Royal Statistical Society.

David is building the AI's protocols for legal reasoning, evidence testing, and drafting. He is building the panel of specialist barristers whose expertise is embedded in the system.

"David is exceptional on all fronts." Chambers and Partners, 2025
"David's advocacy is erudite, assured and reasoned. He is entirely unflappable on his feet even in the most trying of situations. He has fantastic technical acumen." Legal 500, 2025
"David provides first-class advice and representation, staying calm under pressure, especially in high stake cases." Legal 500, 2026
GA
Founder
Grahame Anderson

Barrister, Littleton Chambers. Ranked as a Leading Junior in both Chambers and Partners and the Legal 500 for employment law. Nominated for Employment Junior of the Year at the Legal 500 Bar Awards 2025. Littleton Chambers won Employment Set of the Year at the same awards.

Grahame is an expert in High Court business protection disputes, acting in high-value team move litigation and restrictive covenant injunctions for major corporates. His wider practice covers discrimination, whistleblowing, and complex cases involving questions of territorial jurisdiction.

"A barrister you want on your team. Grahame is a very able lawyer who can combine powerful written submissions with equally powerful advocacy." Chambers and Partners
"His written work and oral advocacy show a very impressive, consistently high standard. He is able to explain complicated concepts/facts in a way that is readily understandable and persuasive." Chambers and Partners
Regulation

DefendThis is not a law firm.

It does not provide legal advice, any more than ChatGPT or Claude do. It produces draft defences and letters of response for regulated lawyers to review.

How It Works
Draft documents. Regulated review.

DefendThis does not conduct litigation, exercise rights of audience, or provide legal advice in the reserved sense under the Legal Services Act 2007. It prepares documents, organises evidence, and produces written materials based on the information the client provides. The documents it produces are drafts. They are marked as drafts. They require review by a regulated lawyer before they are filed with any court or tribunal.

This is the same position as any other AI tool that produces written output. The difference is that DefendThis is built by practising barristers who have designed the system to produce output that a solicitor can review quickly, rather than output that requires substantial reworking.

Public Sector and Corporates
In-house lawyers save time and cost.

For public sector bodies and large corporates, the review is conducted by in-house solicitors or the organisation's panel firm. DefendThis does the preparation. The regulated lawyer reviews it, gives advice where needed, and files. The time and cost savings are substantial because the lawyer is reviewing a near-complete file, not starting from scratch.

SMEs
Partner solicitors review at fixed fees.

For small and medium enterprises without in-house legal, DefendThis partners with solicitors' firms to conduct the review and provide regulated legal advice at fixed fees. The solicitor receives the draft defence or letter of response, the indexed bundle, and the full record of the fact-finding process. Because the preparation is done, the review is faster and cheaper than it would be if the solicitor had taken the case from the outset.

The client receives regulated legal advice. The solicitor files with the tribunal. DefendThis handles the preparation that would otherwise have consumed dozens of hours of billable time.

Information Security

Your data will be yours. We will not be able to see it.

DefendThis will handle sensitive legal documents: employment contracts, disciplinary records, medical reports, grievance correspondence. The platform is being designed so that DefendThis as a company will have no access to client case materials.

Data Architecture
Encrypted. Segregated. Deleted.

All uploaded documents and case materials will be encrypted at rest (AES-256) and in transit (TLS 1.2 or above). Each client's data will be segregated. DefendThis staff will not be able to access client case files. The AI will process the documents to produce the output, but no human at DefendThis will read them.

All case data will be automatically deleted either on a date the client selects, or 15 days after the client's last interaction with the case, whichever comes first. The client will be warned 48 hours before deletion and will be able to download their materials beforehand. No case data will be retained beyond the deletion window. No case data will be used for model training.

GDPR Compliance
UK GDPR compliant by design.

DefendThis will process personal data as a data processor on behalf of the client (the data controller). Processing will be conducted on a lawful basis, with clear privacy notices, defined retention periods, and documented data processing agreements. The client will control their data at all times. Subject access requests, deletion requests, and data portability requests will be supported through the platform.

All data will be stored in UK-based data centres. No case data will leave the United Kingdom.

Certification
Building to public sector standards.

DefendThis will pursue Cyber Essentials Plus certification, the UK government-backed standard required for suppliers handling sensitive or personal data in public sector contracts. Cyber Essentials Plus requires independent technical audit of five core security controls: firewalls, secure configuration, access control, malware protection, and patch management. It is a mandatory requirement for Ministry of Defence suppliers and for central government contracts involving personal data.

Beyond Cyber Essentials Plus, DefendThis intends to achieve ISO 27001 certification, the internationally recognised standard for information security management systems. ISO 27001 covers a broader range of controls including risk management, business continuity, and ongoing audit and improvement. It is widely regarded as the most rigorous information security standard available.

AES-256
Encryption at rest
TLS 1.2+
Encryption in transit
UK
Data centres only
15 days
Maximum retention
Litigation Privilege
Documents produced for the purpose of litigation.

The documents produced by DefendThis will be created for the dominant purpose of defending legal proceedings. They are likely to attract litigation privilege. The client will own the documents. The privilege will belong to the client.

Frequently Asked Questions

Common questions about DefendThis.

The product
1. What does DefendThis actually produce?

DefendThis produces two categories of document. Leonidas produces draft Grounds of Resistance (for employment tribunal claims) and CPR-compliant defences (for civil and commercial claims). Anita produces litigation-privileged witness proofs. All outputs are marked DRAFT. They are designed to be reviewed, amended, and filed by a qualified lawyer.

2. Is this a replacement for a solicitor?

No. DefendThis replaces the fact-gathering and initial drafting stages of the litigation process. A qualified lawyer must review every document before it is filed with a court or tribunal. For organisations with in-house legal teams, the lawyer is the in-house solicitor or general counsel. For SMEs without in-house legal, DefendThis will recommend a partner solicitor who reviews and files at a fixed fee.

3. How does the AI gather facts from witnesses?

Each witness receives a secure link. They answer questions and upload documents from their own desk. The AI tests every answer against the uploaded paperwork. Where the witness's account conflicts with a document, it asks why. Where evidence is missing, it says so. The process is designed by barristers who have spent a combined 35 years litigating cases like the ones the system handles.

4. What types of claim does DefendThis handle?

At launch, DefendThis will handle employment tribunal claims (unfair dismissal, discrimination, whistleblowing, wages), county court civil claims, and commercial disputes. The platform is designed to extend to further claim types as the product matures.

5. How long does the process take?

The traditional process of gathering facts, chasing witnesses, drafting and redrafting takes weeks. DefendThis compresses that into hours. Each witness typically completes their part in 15 to 30 minutes at their desk. The draft is available for review on the same day the last witness completes.

Data and security
6. Who can see my data?

Nobody at DefendThis. The platform is designed so that DefendThis staff have no access to client case materials. All documents are encrypted at rest (AES-256) and in transit (TLS 1.2+). Each client's data is segregated. All data is stored in UK-based data centres. Case data is automatically deleted either on a date the client selects, or 15 days after the client's last interaction, whichever comes first.

7. Is the data used to train the AI?

No. No case data is used for model training. The AI models used by DefendThis are commercial frontier models accessed via API. Client data is processed to produce the output, then deleted according to the retention policy. It is never retained for training purposes.

8. Are the documents privileged?

The documents produced by DefendThis are created for the dominant purpose of defending legal proceedings. They are likely to attract litigation privilege. The privilege belongs to the client.

The founders
9. Who built DefendThis?

Three barristers with thirty-five years of combined experience at the Bar. The founders have experience across employment law, civil litigation, and commercial disputes. The AI operates using protocols designed by the founders, drawing on their experience of drafting defences, proofing witnesses, and advising on settlement.

10. Is DefendThis regulated?

DefendThis Limited is not a law firm and does not provide legal advice. It provides technology that assists with the preparation of legal documents. The draft documents are always reviewed by a qualified lawyer before filing. The founders are individually regulated by the Bar Standards Board.

11. Can I try it now?

Leonidas, the defence drafter, is available in prototype form. The AI is live. You can upload a claim document and work through the full process. Allow 15 to 20 minutes. The output is a working draft defence. We are looking for early conversations with organisations that want to test the platform.

12. What does it cost?

Pricing has not been finalised. The model will vary by organisation type. For large organisations and the public sector, a subscription model is likely. For SMEs, a per-case fee bundled with the partner solicitor's fixed fee is under consideration. We are in early conversations and welcome discussions about pricing structures that work for different types of organisation.

Example A

Employment: The coffee shop claim.

You are the Head of Employment Law (a qualified solicitor) at a national chain of coffee shops. The manager of your Aberystwyth branch has recently dismissed their deputy manager for having a relationship with a member of staff. The deputy manager brings an unfair dismissal claim and makes various allegations of sex discrimination against the manager.

The Platform
What the process looks like inside DefendThis.
defendthis.co.uk/case/coffee-shop-et1
Employment
1
Upload the claim
2
Extracting facts
3
Upload documents
4
Review the facts
5
Additional context
6
Key questions
7
Factual background
8
Legal analysis
Review the facts
The system has extracted 14 factual allegations from the ET1. Confirm, dispute, or flag each one.
Allegation 3
The claimant was employed as deputy manager at the Aberystwyth branch from 14 March 2022.
Agree
Dispute
Not sure
Allegation 7
The branch manager dismissed the claimant for gross misconduct on 8 January 2026.
Agree
Dispute
Not sure
Allegation 9
The company policy classifies workplace relationships as gross misconduct.
Agree
Dispute
Not sure
Allegation 10
No male employee has been dismissed for a workplace relationship in the past three years.
Agree
Dispute
Not sure
The fact review screen. Each allegation is confirmed, disputed, or flagged.
With DefendThis
From claim to drafted response in four days.
01
Monday morning. You upload the ET1 to the DefendThis dashboard. The system reads it, identifies 14 factual allegations, and maps them against the causes of action: unfair dismissal under s.94 ERA 1996 and direct sex discrimination under s.13 EqA 2010.
02
Monday afternoon. You identify the people who hold the facts. The branch manager who made the dismissal decision. The area manager who approved it. The HR adviser who was consulted. DefendThis generates a personal link for each of them.
03
Monday to Wednesday. Each person clicks their link and answers questions at their desk, between shifts, in their own time. The system asks binary questions first. Did you know about the relationship before the dismissal? Yes or no. Were you aware of the company's policy on workplace relationships? Yes or no. Then it probes. The branch manager says the dismissal was for gross misconduct. The system asks what the gross misconduct was. The manager says it was the relationship. The system asks whether the policy says relationships are gross misconduct. The manager uploads the policy. The system reads it and notes that the policy says relationships must be disclosed but does not classify them as gross misconduct. It asks the manager to explain the discrepancy.
04
Wednesday. The area manager completes their questionnaire. They confirm they approved the dismissal but say they relied entirely on the branch manager's recommendation. The system asks whether they reviewed the investigation file. They say no. The system flags this.
05
Thursday morning. All three witnesses have completed their questionnaires and uploaded the documents. The system has cross-referenced the accounts. It has identified two inconsistencies between the branch manager's account and the HR adviser's account of a key meeting. It has noted that the policy does not support the stated reason for dismissal. It produces the drafted Grounds of Resistance and a letter flagging the weaknesses.
06
Thursday afternoon. You review the draft in the dashboard. The weaknesses are clearly marked. You can see where your case is strong (the claimant did breach the disclosure policy) and where it is exposed (the reason given for dismissal does not match the policy). You make amendments, approve the draft, and either file it yourself or send it to your panel solicitor for a final review.
Example B

Civil claim: the wedding disaster.

You are the in-house lawyer at a hotel chain. You receive a Letter of Claim for £30,000 from a couple whose wedding was held at one of your venues. They say the event was ruined by your staff. The food was late. The DJ was cancelled without notice. A member of staff was rude to the bride's mother. They want a full refund and damages.

The Platform
What the process looks like inside DefendThis.
defendthis.co.uk/case/wedding-loc
Civil Claim
1
Upload the claim
2
Extracting facts
3
Upload documents
4
Review the facts
5
Additional context
6
Key questions
7
Factual background
8
Legal analysis
Upload your documents
Upload the contract, correspondence, and any evidence relevant to the claim. The system will cross-reference these against the allegations.
Click to upload or drag files here
Wedding_Contract_2025.pdf
842 KB
DJ_Agency_Booking.pdf
156 KB
Catering_Log_15_Nov.xlsx
94 KB
Incident_Report_Night.pdf
210 KB
DJ_Agency_Apology_Email.pdf
78 KB
Continue
The document upload screen. Evidence is indexed and cross-referenced automatically.
With DefendThis
From claim to drafted response in four days.
01
Day one. You upload the Letter of Claim to the DefendThis dashboard. The system reads it, identifies six specific complaints (food service delayed by 40 minutes, DJ cancelled, staff conduct, three others), and maps them against the contractual terms.
02
Day one. You identify four people who hold the facts. The venue general manager. The catering manager. The events coordinator (now at a different company, but still contactable). The duty manager on the night. DefendThis generates a personal link for each.
03
Days one to three. Each person clicks their link and answers questions. The venue manager is asked: was the food service delayed? They say yes, by approximately 25 minutes, not 40. The system asks them to upload the catering log. They do. The system reads it and notes that the log records a 28-minute delay caused by a kitchen equipment failure, not a staffing issue. It asks the manager whether the claimants were told about the delay at the time. The manager says yes. The system asks whether there is a written record. The manager uploads a text message to the events coordinator confirming the notification.
04
Day two. The events coordinator, now working elsewhere, clicks their link on a lunch break. They confirm the DJ was cancelled because the DJ failed to arrive, not because the hotel cancelled the booking. They upload the DJ's contract and an email from the DJ agency apologising for the no-show. The hotel arranged a replacement within 45 minutes. The system notes that the hotel may have a counterclaim against the DJ agency and flags this.
05
Day three. The duty manager addresses the allegation about rudeness to the bride's mother. They say the conversation was about a noise complaint from an adjacent room. They upload the incident log from the night, which records the complaint and the response. The system notes that the claimants' characterisation of the exchange may not be supported by the contemporaneous record.
06
Day four. The system produces a drafted letter of response. It concedes the food delay (28 minutes, not 40, caused by equipment failure, notified to the claimants at the time). It denies the DJ allegation (the DJ failed to arrive, the hotel sourced a replacement). It disputes the rudeness allegation (the conversation concerned a noise complaint, contemporaneous records support the hotel's account). It proposes a partial settlement reflecting the food delay only. It flags the potential counterclaim against the DJ agency.
Leonidas

Defence drafter.

Leonidas reads the claim, extracts every factual allegation, conducts a structured interview following protocols written by ranked barristers, and drafts a Grounds of Resistance or CPR compliant defence. The prototype is live and produces real output from a live AI model.

CLAIM ET1 or Particulars AI READS Extracts every factual allegation paragraph by paragraph Extraction Witness 1: link sent Witness 2: link sent Witness 3: link sent Each at their desk Leonidas 1 Upload claim 2 Extract facts 3 Your documents 4 Review facts 5 Missing context 6 Key questions 7 Background 8 Defence DEFENCE READINESS Review each factual allegation For each allegation, confirm whether you agree, deny, or need more information. 3 Agreed 1 Denied 1 Put to proof 7 Remaining FACT SUMMARY AGREED (3) Employed from 3 Jan 2022 Line manager Ms Chen Contract dated 3 Jan 22 DENIED (1) No prior consultation re redundancy PUT TO PROOF (1) Loss of earnings GBP 42k FACT 1 Background The claimant was employed from 3 January 2022 as a barista. The claimant's line manager was Ms Chen. Agree FACT 5 Core allegation The claimant alleges they were told their position was redundant on 14 March 2025 without prior consultation. Agree Deny Put to proof EXPLAIN YOUR DENIAL A consultation meeting took place on 10 March. I have the minutes. Uploading now. Drop file to upload FACT 8 Loss and damage The claimant claims loss of earnings of GBP 42,000. Put to proof What each witness sees: the actual Leonidas interface AI CHECKS Tests answers against uploaded documents and flags conflicts Conflict: asks why DRAFT DEFENCE Marked DRAFT. Word document. OR IN-HOUSE LEGAL TEAM Review in dashboard. Amend and file. Your lawyers sign off PARTNER SOLICITOR DefendThis recommends. Fixed fee. For SMEs without in-house legal FILED
The Product
From claim to draft defence. In hours, not weeks.

Leonidas takes a Particulars of Claim or ET1 and works through it paragraph by paragraph. It identifies background facts (parties, dates, terms) and core contested allegations. It asks the respondent to classify each fact: agreed, denied, or put to proof. It then asks targeted questions, probing the points that matter to the legal analysis.

From that material, Leonidas drafts the response. Numbered paragraphs. Restrained pleading. Admissions where appropriate. Denials with brief reasons. The claimant put to strict proof where the respondent cannot admit or deny. The output is a Word document, marked DRAFT, ready for solicitor review.

Status
Prototype. Live. Working.

Leonidas is in prototype form. The AI is live. The interview uses the same reasoning that the production platform will use. The drafted response is produced from the respondent's answers in real time. Allow 15 to 20 minutes to complete the process.

Launch Leonidas →
Anita

Witness proofs.

Anita is in development. When complete, it will speak to witnesses early in the litigation and create litigation-privileged proofs of evidence, using the witnesses' own words. No more waiting until years after events to find out what happened.

CLAIM Received WITHIN DAYS Text interview on screen Phone call ElevenLabs voice Teams call AI agent Witness chooses channel STRUCTURED INTERVIEW What documents can you speak to? What decisions did you make or observe? What conversations did you have? Protocols designed by barristers WITNESS'S OWN WORDS Preserved as spoken PD32 para 18.1 compliant CROSS-REFERENCE Mapped to pleaded case What witness can say per allegation Gaps identified PROOF OF EVIDENCE Litigation-privileged LEGAL TEAM DASHBOARD Witness 1 Complete Witness 2 In progress Witness 3 Complete No flags Inconsistency flagged Gap: no doc for para 8 View proof View proof
The Problem
Witness evidence is taken too late, too expensively, and too inaccurately.

In conventional litigation, witness statements are prepared months or years after the events in question. A solicitor telephones the witness, often years after the relevant events, and asks them to recall what happened. The witness remembers imperfectly. The solicitor writes it up in language the witness would never use. The statement is exchanged shortly before the hearing. The judge reads it and wonders why every witness for the defendant/respondent sounds the same.

The problem is not just quality. It is timing. The defendant/respondent's legal team often does not know what its own witnesses will say until weeks before the hearing. Tactical decisions about settlement, disclosure, and case strategy are made without a clear picture of the evidence. Cases are lost because the defendant/respondent's account was never properly recorded at the outset.

The Rules
Practice Direction 32, paragraph 18.1. The witness's own words.

PD32, paragraph 18.1 requires that a witness statement must, if practicable, be in the intended witness's own words. Practice Direction 57AC, which governs trial witness statements in the Business and Property Courts, reinforces this at paragraph 3.3 and requires the witness to confirm that the statement sets out their personal knowledge and recollection in their own words.

In practice, this requirement is routinely breached. Solicitors draft statements in their own language. The witness's voice is lost. The statement reads as if written by a lawyer, because it was. Judges notice. Credibility suffers.

Anita will address this directly. Because it will record what the witness actually says, in the way the witness actually says it, the resulting proof will comply with PD32 paragraph 18.1 by design. The witness's own words will be preserved from the outset, not reconstructed months later by a solicitor working from incomplete notes.

The Product
Early proofs. The witness's own words. Litigation privilege from the outset.

Anita will conduct structured interviews with each witness as soon as the claim is received. The interview will follow protocols designed by barristers who have spent years proofing witnesses for tribunal hearings. It will identify the documents the witness can speak to, the decisions they made or observed, and the conversations they had.

The witness will choose how to give their account. Anita will work across three channels: a text-based interview on screen, a phone call using ElevenLabs-enabled voice, or a Teams call with an AI agent. The witness picks whichever suits them. The output will be the same: a structured proof in the witness's own words.

01
Early capture. Anita will interview the witness within days of the claim being received, while events are still fresh. The proof will be created at the earliest possible stage, when the witness's recall is at its best.
02
The witness's own words. Anita will record the witness's account in their language, not a solicitor's. The proof will read like the witness speaks. Whether the witness types their answers, speaks on a phone call, or talks through a Teams call with an AI agent, Anita will preserve what they actually said. The spoken account will be transcribed, structured, and presented as a proof of evidence.
03
Mapped to the case. Anita will cross-reference the witness's account against the claimant's pleaded case. For each contested allegation, the proof will identify what the witness can say, what documents support their account, and where the gaps remain. The defendant/respondent's legal team will receive a proof that is already structured around the issues in dispute.
04
Litigation privilege. The proofs will be created for the dominant purpose of defending legal proceedings. They will be litigation-privileged from the outset. The witness's candid account will be protected. This will allow the defendant/respondent's legal team to identify weaknesses early, without those weaknesses being discoverable by the claimant.
05
Multiple witnesses, one platform. In cases with several witnesses, each person will receive their own link and complete their proof independently. The legal team will see all the proofs on a single dashboard, with inconsistencies flagged and gaps highlighted. No more chasing managers across offices and time zones.
Status
In development.

Anita is in the design phase. The witness proofing protocols are being written by the founders, drawing on their experience of proofing witnesses for employment tribunal hearings and High Court trials. Anita will integrate with Leonidas, using the fact classifications and case analysis already gathered during the defence drafting process to structure the witness interviews.

Jesmond

AI-powered grievance management for HR.

A grievance comes in. HR sends the complainant to Jesmond. What follows is a structured, fair, and thorough process that produces better outcomes in less time, with a complete documentary record from start to finish.

GRIEVANCE LETTER Complainant writes to HR JESMOND Structures the complaint without leading the employee PARTICULARISED COMPLAINT Issues identified and organised Employee has full editorial control Freetext field: nothing curtailed LIST OF ISSUES Clear numbered issues for HR Produced automatically from the complaint RECOMMENDED WITNESSES HR and manager have final say MEETING AGENDA Questions for the grievance hearing GRIEVANCE MEETING Jesmond records and transcribes Meeting note produced automatically Transcribed in full WITNESS MEETING 1 Suggested questions from Jesmond Recorded and transcribed WITNESS MEETING 2 Suggested questions from Jesmond Recorded and transcribed WITNESS MEETING 3 Suggested questions from Jesmond Recorded and transcribed GRIEVANCE SUMMARY Yes/no answer for each issue Evidence mapped to each finding Recommendations for the manager GRIEVANCE OUTCOME LETTER Drafted by Jesmond. Manager reviews and sends. Complete audit trail from complaint to outcome
The Problem
Grievances are expensive, slow, and badly documented.

A formal grievance triggers a process that most HR teams dread. The complaint arrives as a long, unfocused letter. HR must work out what the actual issues are. A grievance hearing is arranged. Witness interviews follow. At the end of it, someone has to write up the outcome, often weeks later, from memory and sparse notes. The process is slow, inconsistent, and produces documentation that would not survive scrutiny at tribunal.

The cost is not just time. Badly handled grievances cause legal risk. Jesmond fixes this from the inside out.

The Product
Seven stages. Complaint to outcome. Every step recorded.
01
Complaint intake. The complainant is sent to Jesmond. The AI works through the grievance with them, helping them particularise their complaint properly. It organises their thoughts without leading them. At the end, the complainant has a freetext field where they can change the final document however they choose. Nothing curtails their rights.
02
List of issues and recommended witnesses. From the particularised complaint, Jesmond produces a numbered list of issues for HR and recommends which witnesses should be interviewed. HR and the grievance manager have the final say on both.
03
Meeting preparation. Jesmond creates an agenda and a list of questions for the grievance hearing, based on the revised complaint and the identified issues. The grievance manager goes into the meeting prepared.
04
Grievance meeting. Jesmond records the grievance meeting and transcribes it. At the end, it produces a meeting note automatically. No more writing up meetings from memory two weeks later.
05
Witness meetings. For each witness, Jesmond suggests questions tailored to the issues raised. It records each meeting and transcribes it. Every interview is documented contemporaneously.
06
Grievance summary. Jesmond produces a summary with a yes or no answer to each issue for the grievance manager, with the evidence mapped to each finding. The manager sees where the complaint is upheld and where it is not, with the reasons set out.
07
Grievance outcome. Jesmond helps the grievance manager draft the outcome letter. The letter addresses every issue, records the findings, and explains the reasoning. The manager reviews, amends, and sends.
Why Jesmond
The grievance process that lets managers focus on the real issues, then get back to their jobs.
01
Fairness to the complainant. The employee's complaint is properly particularised without being led or constrained. They have full editorial control of the final document. Their words, their issues, their complaint.
02
Complete audit trail. Every meeting recorded. Every transcript preserved. Every witness interview documented. If the grievance later becomes a tribunal claim, the documentary record is already there.
03
Consistency. The same structured process for every grievance, regardless of which manager conducts it. No more variation in quality depending on who in the HR team picks up the file.
04
Speed. The meeting notes, the witness interview records, and the grievance summary are produced as the process runs. The outcome letter is drafted within hours of the final witness interview, not weeks later.
05
Cost. The grievance process currently absorbs days of management time and often results in external legal advice. Jesmond compresses the administrative work and produces documentation that reduces the need for lawyers at the grievance stage.
For large organisations
A grievance management platform, not a one-off tool.

For organisations handling dozens of grievances a year, Jesmond provides a dashboard view of every active grievance across the business. HR sees the status of each case, the issues raised, the witnesses identified, and the timeline. Grievance managers see their cases and the materials Jesmond has prepared for them.

The platform captures institutional data on grievance patterns: which issues recur, which departments generate complaints, and where the process breaks down. That data is not available from a filing cabinet full of outcome letters written by different managers in different styles.

Status
In development.

Jesmond is in the design phase. The grievance protocols are being written by the founders, drawing on their experience of advising respondents on grievance processes and the tribunal claims that arise from them. Jesmond will integrate with Leonidas: where a grievance leads to a tribunal claim, the entire grievance record, including the transcripts, the evidence, and the outcome, feeds directly into the defence drafting process.

How it works

From claim form to filed defence, in five steps.

The DefendThis platform sits inside the organisation defending the claim. By the time external lawyers are instructed, the substantive work has already been done. The five steps below run in sequence.

Step 01
A claim arrives.
A Particulars of Claim, ET1, letter before action, or other originating document lands with the in-house legal team. The clock starts. The 28-day window for filing a response begins to close.
Step 02
The in-house solicitor uploads the claim.
The in-house solicitor uploads the Particulars of Claim to the platform. The platform is already trained on the organisation's internal documents: policies, procedures, standard contracts, and prior matters. It reads the new claim against that institutional context from the first second.
Step 03
The platform extracts the allegations and questions the witnesses.
Every factual allegation in the claim is extracted and indexed. The platform generates a structured, AI-powered questionnaire for each key witness on the ground, tailored to what that witness can speak to. The questionnaires go out automatically.
Step 04
Witnesses give their account.
The witnesses respond in their own words, prompted by targeted follow-up questions where the answers are incomplete or inconsistent. They upload any documents in their possession that bear on the issues. The platform cross-references each answer against the documents.
Step 05
The in-house solicitor receives a complete first draft.
The in-house solicitor is sent a draft Grounds of Resistance or Defence, a draft witness statement for each witness, and an indexed bundle of the relevant documents. By the time external firms are instructed, the majority of the work is already done.
The result
By the time external firms are instructed, the substantive work is already done.

The premise of DefendThis is that the slowest part of defending any claim is not the drafting. It is the gathering of facts from the people who hold them. Witnesses are dispersed, busy, and often reluctant. By the time their accounts have been collected, weeks have passed and the response deadline is close.

By embedding fact-gathering into a guided platform, that lag is removed. The witness account, the documents, and the legal analysis are produced in parallel rather than in series.

The output is a working first draft. Internal lawyers can finalise it in hours. External firms, when instructed, start from a complete file rather than a blank page.