Knowledge vault
Your precedents, checked against current law
A firm-private space for your own materials, and a continuing check on whether the positions they take still match the law as it stands.
The problem
A precedent does not tell you when it goes out of date
Reviewing the back catalogue against current law is easy to defer, and it usually is deferred until something surfaces.
A firm's know-how is written against the law as it stood on the day it was drafted. In digital asset, AI and fintech regulation that day ages quickly: guidance is replaced, an instrument commences, a regulator shifts position. The precedent itself does not change, and nothing about opening it signals that the ground underneath it has moved.
Firms handle this with periodic review, which is expensive, or by relying on whoever happens to remember, which is not a control at all. DALI treats it as something the platform should notice.
How it works
Positions are extracted, then corroborated
Your document is never trusted on its face, nor treated as wrong. It is compared against the corpus, and the comparison is cited.
Up to date
The corpus supports the positions the document asserts. Nothing to do.
Diverges
The corpus contradicts or supersedes one or more of the document's positions. This is the state that matters. It is how a superseded precedent announces itself before it reaches a client.
No authority found
The corpus does not address the positions asserted. Not a contradiction, but not corroboration either, and worth knowing which of the two you have.
When a document is uploaded, DALI extracts the legal positions it asserts and checks each against the corpus, citing the authority behind the verdict so a lawyer can go and read it rather than take the flag on trust.
What kind of document it is changes what a divergence means. An internal summary of the law that diverges is most likely simply out of date. A firm precedent that diverges may be a deliberate house view, knowingly taken. DALI distinguishes the two rather than raising the same alarm for both.
Staying current
Re-checked when the corpus moves, not on a calendar
A fixed review cycle is either too frequent to be worth running or too slow to catch anything.
DALI tracks the state of the corpus for each jurisdiction. When that state changes (new sources ingested, existing ones re-captured or superseded), documents whose verdicts were formed against the older corpus become eligible for re-checking, and are re-checked as they are next used. Documents are not re-examined while nothing beneath them has moved, so the cost falls where the risk is. A check can also be triggered by hand at any time.
The result is that the question “does this precedent still reflect current law?” stops being a periodic exercise somebody has to remember, and becomes a signal attached to the document.
Confidentiality
Firm-private, enforced in the data layer
Vault material belongs to the organisation that uploaded it. Every query is scoped to the authenticated organisation, and that scoping is enforced at the data-access layer rather than by convention in application code, so there is no path by which one firm’s material reaches another’s research.
Research then draws on both the public curated corpus and the firm’s own documents, while the firm’s material stays inside its boundary. See security and data handling for how that is implemented.
Bring a precedent you are unsure about
The quickest way to judge this is on a document of your own that you suspect has aged. We will run it and show you what the corpus says.