How in-house teams use Justis AI

The problem

Most of the queue is the same kind of paper: a SaaS subscription, a services agreement, a distribution contract, each on the counterparty's form. Each one has to be read against the same positions on liability, indemnity, renewal, data and governing law, and each one is wanted back by the business the same day.

When the positions live in one senior lawyer's head, they drift. A cap accepted under pressure last quarter becomes the precedent the next vendor cites.

How Justis handles it

Write the company's positions down once as a playbook, per contract type, with the preferred term, the fallback and the point at which it goes to the General Counsel. Justis reads each incoming agreement against it, quotes the clause that departs, and says which position applies.

It marks up the counterparty's own Word file as tracked changes with the reason for each change in a comment, and writes a short note for the business owner in plain language: what was changed, what is still open and what needs their decision.

The problem

The business signs dozens of NDAs a month, for vendors, partners, candidates and potential acquirers. Each one is short and none of them is identical: one is one-way when it should be mutual, one has no end date for the obligations, one includes a non-solicit that nobody asked for.

Reading them properly takes more time than they seem to deserve, and skimming them is how a residuals clause or an unlimited indemnity gets signed.

How Justis handles it

Set the NDA positions once and let Justis triage each incoming NDA: sign as is, sign with the listed changes, or send to a lawyer. It gives the reason for each call with the clause quoted.

For a batch, a tabular review puts every NDA in a row with the points that matter in columns, so the team sees the whole week's NDAs on one screen.

The problem

The company holds several hundred signed contracts, many of which renew automatically unless notice is given months in advance. Nobody owns the calendar, so the renewals that should have been renegotiated simply roll over at the vendor's new price.

The same contract base is where the business's other questions land: which contracts can we exit for convenience, which ones still name the supplier we replaced, which ones let the customer audit us.

How Justis handles it

Upload the signed contracts to a project and ask once. Tabular review returns a grid of every agreement with the term, the renewal mechanism, the notice period and the last date to give notice, each cell citing the clause and page.

Sort it by the last date for notice, export it to Excel, and ask Justis to draft the non-renewal or renegotiation notices for the ones the business wants to act on.

The problem

The company's signed contracts sit in a shared drive: Word files, PDFs from the counterparty, and a third of them scanned from paper with stamps and signatures. Nobody can say from it how much the company spends a year and in which currency, which contracts renew on their own, which are governed by foreign law, or which were never signed by both sides.

Reading a hundred agreements to answer that takes a junior lawyer two weeks, and the answers are in a spreadsheet nobody can check against the page they came from.

How Justis handles it

Put the repository in a matter and run one tabular review over all of it. Justis reads each file, runs OCR on the scans, and fills one row per contract: the counterparty, type, effective and expiry dates, auto-renewal, notice period, annual value and currency, yearly escalation, governing law, signatures, red flags and a risk rating. Every cell cites the page it came from.

Each column has its own type, so dates sort as dates, amounts as numbers and the risk rating as a pill. Sort by expiry, filter the High-risk rows, export to Excel, and ask the review's chat to explain a row or draft the non-renewal letters.

The problem

Marketing wants to launch a free trial that converts to a paid plan, sales wants to promise a customer a service credit, and finance asks whether a vendor can be paid in advance. Each question needs a quick, correct answer, and a quick answer given without the provision behind it is the one that gets relied on later.

The same questions come back from different people, and the answer given last time is in someone's email.

How Justis handles it

Ask Justis the question as the business put it. It searches the Indian law collection of Acts, rules, regulator circulars and judgments, answers in plain language, and cites the provision or document for each point, including the company's own policies and contracts in the matter.

It marks what depends on facts it does not have and what is a judgment for you, and can turn the answer into a short note for the business in your team's format.

The problem

The Digital Personal Data Protection Rules were notified in November 2025, and most of the obligations under the Act apply eighteen months later. In that window the company has to know what personal data it holds and why, rewrite its notices so that consent is informed and specific, put processing terms into every vendor contract, and build a breach process that informs the Data Protection Board and the affected people.

The work is spread across the privacy policy, the consent flows, dozens of vendor contracts and the HR systems, and the board wants one answer: what do we have to change, and by when.

How Justis handles it

Upload the privacy policy, the consent notices, the vendor contracts and any data map the company has. Justis reads them against the DPDP Act 2023 and the Rules 2025, and returns the gap list: each obligation, what the company has today, what has to change, and the date from which it applies, each cited to the provision.

It runs a tabular review of the vendor contracts for processing terms, drafts the revised notice and the data processing addendum, and prepares the memo for the board.

The problem

The four Labour Codes came into force on 21 November 2025, replacing twenty-nine central labour laws. The company's appointment letters, salary structures, standing orders and HR policies still cite the old Acts, and some of what they do has changed in substance.

The definition of wages is the change that moves money: allowances above half of total remuneration are added back into wages, which changes the base for provident fund, gratuity and bonus. Fixed-term employees now earn gratuity after one year of service.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the appointment letters, salary structures and HR policies against the Code on Wages, the Industrial Relations Code, the Code on Social Security and the Occupational Safety, Health and Working Conditions Code. It lists each place the company's documents cite a repealed Act or conflict with a Code, with the provision.

It tests the salary structures against the wages definition, flags the grades where the base will move, and redrafts the appointment letter template and the policies as tracked changes.

The problem

A complaint of sexual harassment reaches the Internal Committee, and from that moment the POSH Act sets the procedure: the complaint within three months of the incident, the inquiry completed within ninety days, the report within ten days of completing it, and the employer's action on its recommendations within sixty days.

Internal Committee members are usually not lawyers, and an inquiry that skips a step, such as giving the respondent the complaint and a chance to reply, is the one that is set aside.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the complaint, the reply and the witness statements, including recorded hearings transcribed in English or Hindi, and builds the timeline of the inquiry with every statutory date computed from the documents.

It prepares a procedural checklist for the committee, a summary of each party's account with the page it comes from, and a draft of the inquiry report structured around the findings the committee has to make. The findings themselves are the committee's.

The problem

Most contracts start as an email: the business has picked a vendor, attached the quote and wants the agreement by Thursday. The email says what the business wants and the quote says what the vendor wants, and they rarely agree on dates, money or who owns the work.

Someone in legal has to read both, find what was never decided, and turn it into the company's template before the purchase order goes out. When that is done in a hurry, the vendor's quotation terms become the contract.

How Justis handles it

Attach the email and the quote with your services template. Justis reads them together, checks the quote's arithmetic and terms against the template and your internal approval limits, and drafts the agreement and statement of work in Word from your template, with the business's commercial terms filled in.

Where the request and the quote conflict, or a decision has not been made, it does not choose for the business: it leaves the point bracketed in the draft and lists the questions for the business owner in a short cover note.

The problem

Large customers send their own contract and expect it signed. A school group's procurement agreement was written for buying furniture or building works, so it carries uncapped liquidated damages, payment on certification and unlimited liability, and sales has promised a start date.

Each of those clauses has to be marked up in the customer's own file, with a reason the customer's procurement team will accept, and sales needs to know which points are worth a fight.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the customer's agreement against your sales positions and the law that applies, and redlines the customer's Word file as tracked changes with a comment on each change that explains it in the customer's terms.

It gives sales an issues list ordered by commercial weight, with the fallback you can offer on each point and the points that need the General Counsel.

The problem

Before a bank, insurer or large company onboards you as a vendor, it sends its third-party risk questionnaire: thirty questions on identity, ownership, security, data location, insurance and continuity, with a signature at the end. The answers are scattered across the company profile, the security policy and the insurance schedule.

A questionnaire filled in a rush is a set of representations the customer will rely on. The dangerous answers are the confident yeses: a certificate that has lapsed, data that is backed up abroad, a notice period the company cannot meet.

How Justis handles it

Attach the customer's blank form in Word with your company fact sheet and policies. Justis completes the form item by item from those documents, keeping the customer's layout, and notes the source of each answer.

Where the honest answer is No, or the documents disagree with the customer's mandatory requirement, it writes the accurate answer and flags it for you instead of ticking the box. Items the documents do not answer are left marked for the person who knows.

The problem

Legal notices reach the company through reception, the old registered office, an email inbox and HR. Each one has its own deadline, counted from a different date, and some carry statutory consequences: a cheque notice under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act gives fifteen days from receipt.

When nobody holds one list, the notice that matters most is the one sitting in a forwarded bundle, and a reply goes out after the date it was needed.

How Justis handles it

Upload the notices as they arrive and run a tabular review across them. Each row is a notice; the columns are who sent it, who it is addressed to, when it was dated and received, what it demands, the law it invokes and the date the response is due, each cell citing the page.

Sort by the due date, export it to Excel for the team, and ask Justis to draft the reply to any notice from the same matter.

The problem

A regulator writes asking seven questions about how the company sells subscriptions, with fifteen days to answer under the signature of an authorised officer. The answers sit with product, support and payments, and their figures do not always agree.

The reply is the first thing the regulator will read about the company. Every number in it has to reconcile, every document has to be the version that applied, and a question the company cannot answer has to be said plainly rather than filled.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the notice, the company's terms and the data the teams send, maps each question to the material that answers it, and checks the figures against each other before anything is drafted.

It drafts the reply in your format with an annexure index, marks the questions the records cannot answer, and writes a separate internal note on the exposure the answers reveal, with the provisions behind it. Nothing is sent; the reply goes to the signing officer as a draft.