Ask the supplier
Where does a client file go?
Not just which country hosts it: which provider receives it, what is logged, who can access it and whether it can be retained or used for training.
Solicitors and SRA-regulated firms
Private AI for law firms, with client files kept inside your network
Cortex searches the documents your team already has permission to use, returns an answer with the source attached, and says when the answer is not there. The model and the files run on hardware in your building, not through a public AI account.
Fixed scopeQuoted before work starts
Human controlDecisions stay with your team
Honest boundaryKeep existing systems where they work
The warning changes the buying questions
The SRA does not ban AI. Its warning says firms remain responsible for their work and should address inaccurate output and client confidentiality. That means “does it write quickly?” is a secondary question.
Ask the system
Where did this answer come from?
An answer used in legal work needs a quick route back to the document. Cortex attaches the source rather than presenting fluent text as proof.
Ask the firm
Who verifies and remains accountable?
Private deployment changes the data path; it does not transfer professional judgement or accountability to the software.
Primary source: SRA warning notice: Misuse of AI, published 17 August 2026. Also see the SRA's confidentiality of client information guidance.
What private means here
“Private AI” is often used to describe an account setting. Cortex uses it literally: the appliance, model and document index are installed on the firm's own network.
Data path
Files stay in the building
Questions and documents are processed locally. There is no external model provider in the answer path.
Permissions
Access follows the source
People should only receive answers from material they were already allowed to access. The permitted folders and groups are agreed during installation.
Verification
Every answer points back
The source document is shown with the answer so a fee earner can verify it instead of trusting an unsupported summary.
Uncertainty
Not found means not found
If the requested fact is absent from the permitted files, the system says so. It is not instructed to fill a gap with a plausible invention.
Ownership
The firm owns the appliance
The hardware, installed models and software are bought outright. There is no per-seat usage meter or licence that removes access to the system.
Network
Internet-independent operation
The core document-question workflow can operate with the internet disconnected because it does not call a hosted model.
The work it is designed to help with
The strongest use is finding, comparing and assembling information already held by the firm—not outsourcing legal judgement.
Matter and precedent files
Questions with a checkable source
- Find the clause, date or instruction across a permitted matter folder
- Locate the latest recorded position and the document that states it
- Compare defined points across versions or related documents
- Retrieve internal precedent and know which file supplied it
Internal operations
Answers from the firm's own material
- Find an internal policy, process or approved template
- Answer onboarding and practice questions from current documents
- Search long-running project and client records
- Reduce repeated questions to the person who remembers
Not its job: supplying unchecked case citations, replacing legal research, deciding the law, advising a client, or turning a professional judgement into an automatic decision. A sourced answer still requires the firm's review.
A deliberately bounded pilot
The first useful test is not “connect the whole document estate”. It is one contained document set, one permission group and a set of questions whose correct sources are already known.
Example pilot shape
- Document set
- One approved internal policy library or a closed, suitably authorised sample matter set.
- Access
- A named test group with the same permissions as the source material.
- Test questions
- Known-answer, absent-answer, ambiguous and permission-boundary questions.
- Checks
- Source accuracy, access control, “not found” behaviour and response usefulness.
- Decision
- Expand, change the scope or stop. The pilot is evidence, not a commitment to a firm-wide rollout.
What should be in place around the appliance
Firm controls
Governance is still a firm responsibility
- An AI-use policy people can actually follow
- Named owners for approval and review
- Clear prohibited and permitted uses
- A verification rule for any output used in work
Technical controls
Configuration must match the written rules
- Approved source folders and permission groups
- Document update and removal process
- Backups, monitoring and incident responsibility
- A tested route to disable or restrict access
Need the policy first? Inferred's free AI Policy Pack is built in your browser, requires no email address and can be edited by your own adviser.
How the engagement is priced
Qualify
Initial enquiry · free
Bring the document question or confidentiality constraint. If a private appliance is excessive, we will say so.
Measure
Operations Audit · £895
A written assessment of the work, document sources, risks and whether a simpler automation should come first.
Install
Cortex · from £4,950
The appliance, local models, installation and team training. One price for the firm, with no per-seat charge.
No compliance claim: Cortex can provide a more controlled technical architecture and evidence about how it handles data. The firm and its advisers must decide whether the complete arrangement meets its legal and regulatory obligations.
Questions law firms ask
Does on-premise automatically mean secure?
No. Access controls, patching, backups, physical security and operating procedures still matter. Local deployment removes an external data path; it does not remove the need to manage the system.
Does the model train on our client files?
No external provider receives the files for model training. The local document index exists to retrieve permitted sources; it is not a public training contribution.
Can it search every matter?
Only the material the firm deliberately connects and the user is permitted to access. Starting with everything would make a poor pilot and a dangerous permissions test.
Would a cloud product be cheaper?
Often, for a small team with light use and acceptable provider terms. The case for Cortex is strongest where local control, document volume and firm-wide use justify owning the system.
Test the architecture on one bounded document set
The first call is free. We will tell you whether Cortex, simpler automation or no purchase is the sensible next step.
If the honest answer is that the process needs the system rebuilt rather than one step automated, that is a bespoke matter and document system.