Contract intelligence, drafting against the current text, regulatory compliance and automated document analysis for practices that run on volume. We build systems that read the file, extract what matters, and keep client documents inside your perimeter instead of in a public chatbot. Data in Tunisia.
For a law practice, a notary's office or an accounting firm, the work is not the reasoning, it is the pile. Contracts, filings, deeds, exhibits, judgments, invoices, correspondence, and a legal framework that keeps moving underneath all of it. One law on cheques took an estimated 120,000 cases a year out of the courts, then an amnesty sent a wave of files through every practice that handles them. Meanwhile your team is already putting client documents into public AI tools to keep up, which is a breach of professional secrecy waiting to be discovered. Reading all of it carefully is what you sell, and reading it by hand is what is eating your margin.
The problems we solve every day for organizations like yours.
Loi n° 2023-41 on cheques, the 2025 amnesty that more than 63,000 people used, the notarial regime under negotiation: each change means re-reading open files and re-advising clients who are waiting. Keeping up is not a project you finish, it is a subscription you are currently paying in partner hours.
It is the rational thing to do when the pile is taller than the day, and it is also the most serious exposure in the firm. A contract, a client name, a settlement figure pasted into a public assistant leaves your perimeter, may be retained, and cannot be un-sent. Nobody has to be careless for this to become a disciplinary matter, they only have to be busy.
A firm bills for judgement and pays for reading. A junior's day goes into sorting, re-typing and cross-checking documents, and the judicial system itself runs on paper at a scale that is hard to picture from outside: more than 4.3 million judgments have already been digitised in the national archiving programme. The substance is in documents, and those documents are unreadable at the speed you need.
Scans, photographs, handwritten exhibits, PDFs from the other side, invoices in every format, Arabic and French, sometimes inside the same document. Nothing is searchable, so what the firm knows about a matter is whatever the person who handled it remembers. When that person is on holiday, or leaves, the firm loses it.
Drafting starts from an old file, a colleague's precedent, or a template downloaded years ago. Clauses that no longer match the text in force travel forward unnoticed, and the error is found only when it matters. A precedent is not a source of law, but it is how most drafting actually happens.
The ministry is pushing digital transformation through the judicial system, from electronic archiving to the first fully digital hearings. Counterparties and courts will exchange files digitally. If your own intake is still a filing cabinet, the gap only widens from here.
In professional services the rule is not a constraint you satisfy once. It is the material your work is made of, and in Tunisia it has moved twice in two years.
The reform of article 411 of the code de commerce relieved the courts of an estimated 120,000 cases a year, and the 2025 amnesty then pushed a wave of files through every practice that handles them. Systems you can re-rule when the rule changes beat systems that hard-code it.
The proposed amendment to the law on notarial instruments is contested by the barreau, which reads it as an attack on acquired rights. Whatever the outcome, authentic instruments and the rules around them are being rewritten, and the documents already in your files will have to be read against the new text.
Professional secrecy does not bend because the tool is convenient. A client file pasted into a public assistant leaves your perimeter and may be retained, which is a secrecy problem before it is a data problem, and loi organique n° 2004-63 adds the second layer. We deploy inside your perimeter, in Tunisia, mask personal data before it is indexed, log access per matter, and never train models on client files.
Electronic archiving has digitised more than 4.3 million judgments and close to 30,000 court registers, and the first fully digital hearings have been held. The institutions you deal with are changing their format of exchange. Your intake has to match it.
Concrete applications that deliver measurable outcomes.
Read a contract the way a partner would: parties, obligations, dates, penalties, renewal, termination and governing law, extracted and comparable across a whole portfolio, in Arabic and French.
Draft from your own precedents, checked clause by clause against the law as it currently stands, so a template that has aged shows up as a flagged clause instead of a surprise two years later.
When a text changes, the system tells you which of your open matters are affected and what the change implies, instead of waiting for a client to ask the question first.
Assemble the documents a matter requires, check what is missing and produce the index, so the file is complete before it reaches a court, a counterparty or an auditor.
Scans, photographs and handwriting put through OCR, then classified, dated, named and made searchable on arrival, in Arabic and French, so nothing waits for someone to file it.
Invoices read and structured as they arrive, matched against the matter, the engagement or the client account, with totals, dates and references extracted without anyone re-keying them.
Prescription and procedural deadlines tracked per matter, calculated from the dates inside the documents themselves, and surfaced where nobody can miss them.
Every document of a matter in one searchable place, so what the firm learned on one case is available to the next one instead of living in someone's memory.
Our core solutions tailored to the requirements of your sector.
An assistant over your own documents that answers with the clause, the date and the source, not a summary you have to verify blindly.
The pipeline from intake to filing: OCR, classification, contract and invoice extraction, deadlines, and the register that keeps a matter's history in one place.
Retrieval, drafting and comparison systems engineered around your practice areas and deployed in your own infrastructure, so client files never leave your control.
No. It retrieves, extracts, drafts and flags, and a lawyer decides. It answers with the passage it read so you can verify in seconds, and where the document does not say something, it says so instead of filling the gap.
Because that is the exposure, not the solution. A public assistant takes your client documents outside your perimeter, may retain them, offers no access control per matter, and leaves you no record of what was sent. Busy people doing the rational thing is exactly how a firm ends up with a secrecy problem it cannot reconstruct. The alternative is the same convenience with the documents staying inside your walls.
Personal data is detected and masked or redacted before anything is stored or indexed, access is scoped per matter, every action is logged, nothing is used to train our models, and the deployment sits in your infrastructure in Tunisia. Our AI management practices and documentation follow ISO/IEC 42001, so the answer to your insurer or your client is a document rather than a promise. Removing names is not the whole job, so we also check that the fields left behind cannot be combined to single out one client.
That is the realistic case, and it is where most tools fail, so we build for it explicitly with OCR trained on the document types you actually receive, and we measure it on your own files. You get the accuracy to expect per document type rather than a promise of perfection, and the low-confidence cases come to a human.
The first version covers one document type you already process every week, on your own files, before you commit to anything. If it has not given back the time it cost within the first month, it has failed, and we will be the first to say so.
It removes the reading and the re-keying, not the training. A junior who spends the day re-typing learns nothing, while a junior who checks an extraction and argues about the clause becomes a lawyer faster. The role changes. Whether the headcount changes is your decision, not the system's.