Dipp AIDipp AI

Case study · Legal Services

A law firm made the instruction, not the output, the thing on the record

When a client asked what the firm had instructed the system to do, the answer was a hashed directive with a partner's name on it.

International law firm · 1,400 fee earners · published July 22, 2026

Download the PDFApply for early access

3

client technology audits passed with no findings

100%

of agent review work traceable to a supervising partner

1 day

to produce a matter supervision record

from 3 weeks

31%

reduction in first-pass review hours

Summary

An international law firm needed agent-assisted review to be defensible to clients and to its own risk committee. Orcher's Directive Interface preserved the instruction in the words the supervising partner used, bound it to that partner, and hashed it with the work product.

Orcher components enforced

Solution: Governance & audit evidence

The situation

What was happening before Orcher.

  • Agent-assisted document review was in use on three large matters with no record of the instructions given.
  • Client audit rights extended to the firm's use of technology, and the firm could not evidence supervision.
  • Professional-conduct obligations attach to a named lawyer, not to a platform.

What Orcher enforced

The control surface, component by component.

  • Directive Interface captured the supervising partner's instruction verbatim as the permanent statement of scope.
  • Role Identity Fabric bound the directive to the partner and the matter, with associate delegation as a derived, narrower scope.
  • The ledger hashes the instruction, the review output and the supervision chain together, so they cannot be separated later.
  • Matter-level export produces a client-ready supervision record without touching privileged content unnecessarily.

The data

Measured over the engagement window.

ArtefactBeforeAfter
Instruction given to the systemNot recordedVerbatim, hashed
Supervising lawyerInferred from matter teamBound to the directive
Delegation to associatesInformalDerived, narrower scope
Client audit response3 weeks, manual1 day, exported
Privilege handlingCase-by-caseEnforced at the boundary

Supervision artefacts before and after deployment.

Outcomes

What the organisation did next.

  • The risk committee approved agent-assisted review for all matter types, having previously limited it to three matters.
  • Two clients cited the supervision record as a factor in panel reappointment.
  • Associates gained clearer scope than the informal delegation they had before.
  • The firm now quotes technology-supervised review as a distinct service line.
“Our obligation is personal. If the record cannot say which partner instructed the machine, the record is not good enough.”
— General Counsel, international law firm (partner declined attribution by name)

Read further

The research behind this engagement.

Disclosure. Design-partner engagement, anonymised at the partner's request. Figures are measured by Orcher's own observability and ledger instrumentation over the stated period and have not been independently audited. Market figures carry their own source line.

More engagements

Other organisations that had to prove the same thing.

Run this pattern on your own workflow

Design partners deploy Orcher on one directive class, instrument it the way this study was instrumented, and keep the evidence whatever they decide afterwards.

Apply for early accessAll case studies