Machine Translation Vs Human Times are changing, and firms are embracing technology at a much faster pace. Printed documents, folders, video cassettes and CDs are quickly becoming relics of the past. There are now more places where evidence can be stored or located. One such example would be Social media platforms that are part of […]
Finding duplicate files within a dataset is easy, anyone can do it. Finding files that are almost identical is more difficult, but it’s useful for cases where you have an abundance of documents within a legal review that are practically identical
A managed service often involves a single litigation support provider offering a set of eDiscovery functions to a corporation or law firm over a sustained period using the provider’s custom built processes, procedures and expertise.
Construction litigation has the reputation of being highly complex, extremely time-consuming and prohibitively expensive.
So we’re eDiscovery providers. We sell high end software to our legal clients so they can undertake document review, that’s their work. It makes them much more efficient so they can justify charging several hundred dollars an hour for their time. Thousands of developers work on products like Relativity, Ringtail etc to customise these products specifically for the legal market.
The recent decision in Pyrrho Investments Ltd v. MWB Property Ltd accepting the use of predictive coding (or Technology Assisted Review: TAR) was a landmark ruling in the High Court of England and Wales. Meanwhile, Antipodeans are still awaiting their judicial eureka moment endorsing the use of predictive coding.