How healthcare legal teams use Justis AI

Hospital legal work is a reading problem. A negligence notice arrives and the answer is in a case sheet of three hundred handwritten pages. An inspection is due and the licences for six units sit in six folders with six renewal dates. A trial site agreement, a consultant's contract and a device supply agreement all wait on the same two people, and each one answers to a different regulator.

Justis reads the record with you. Upload the file to a project and it reads every page, handwritten notes and scans included, sets the facts against the rule that applies, and drafts the reply or the redline. Every conclusion carries the document and page it came from, and where an entry is illegible or a point of law is unsettled, it says so rather than filling the gap.

01

A negligence notice, read against the case sheet

The problem

A legal notice or a consumer complaint alleges a sequence: delayed diagnosis, no consent, a missed referral, a discharge too early. The answer is in the case sheet, the nursing notes, the anaesthesia record and the discharge summary, much of it handwritten, and the treating team remembers it differently from how it was written.

Under the Consumer Protection Act 2019 the written version is due within thirty days of service, extendable by no more than fifteen, so there is little time to read the record twice.

How Justis handles it

Upload the complaint and the medical record. Justis reads both, runs OCR on the handwritten pages and tells you when it is doing so, then sets each allegation against what the record shows, with the page on each side.

It marks entries that are undated, overwritten or missing, which matter as much as what the record says, checks the forum's pecuniary jurisdiction and the limitation period, and drafts the written version in your format.

What comes backExample
Example output: A negligence notice, read against the case sheet
What comes backExample
Record readCase sheet of 286 pages, 212 handwritten, read by OCR
Allegation holdsNo fresh consent for the second procedure on 06.02.2026; only the first consent is on file (p. 41)
Allegation failsReferral to cardiology within 36 hours, recorded in the nursing notes at p. 118
Record riskTwo progress notes undated and one overwritten, pp. 131 and 134
Forum and timeServed 02.09.2026: written version due 02.10.2026, outer limit 17.10.2026
DeliverableDraft written version in Word with a list of dates

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Allegations against the record
Read the complaint and the full medical record in this project. For each allegation, say whether the record supports it, with the page on each side, list any undated, overwritten or missing entries, and compute the deadline for the written version from service on 2 September 2026.

03

The licence register for every unit

The problem

A hospital runs on registrations and clearances: the clinical establishment registration under the state Act, biomedical waste authorisation, the fire NOC, AERB licences for imaging, PC-PNDT registration, drug licences for the pharmacy and the blood centre licence. Each has its own renewal date and its own conditions.

They are scanned into different folders by different units, and the register that tracks them is a spreadsheet last updated before the new wing opened.

How Justis handles it

Upload the licences and tabular review returns a register: the licence, the unit, the authority, the expiry date and the conditions attached, with the document and page behind each row.

Justis flags what has lapsed or will lapse within the window you choose, lists the conditions a unit may not be meeting, and drafts the renewal cover letters for your team to file.

What comes backExample
Example output: The licence register for every unit
What comes backExample
Documents read54 licences and clearances across 4 units
LapsedFire NOC for the main block, expired 12.02.2026
Due within 90 daysAERB licence for the CT unit and the biomedical waste authorisation
Condition at riskPC-PNDT registration lists two machines; the imaging inventory shows three
DeliverablesLicence register in Excel and renewal cover letters in Word

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Licence register
Read every licence and registration in this project and build a register by unit: licence, issuing authority, expiry date and attached conditions, with the page for each. Flag anything lapsed or expiring in the next 90 days and any condition the unit may not be meeting.

04

Consultant and doctor engagement agreements

The problem

Visiting consultants are engaged on dozens of agreements: fixed retainers, fee-for-service, revenue shares. A share tied to referred diagnostics looks like a commission for referrals, which the professional conduct regulations for doctors prohibit, and an uncapped indemnity for clinical acts puts the hospital's balance sheet behind a doctor it does not employ.

The agreements were negotiated one at a time, and nobody knows how many carry which terms.

How Justis handles it

Your positions go into a playbook once: how compensation may be structured, who indemnifies whom and up to what cap, what insurance the doctor carries, and how patient data may be used. Every agreement is read against it, the offending clause is quoted back, and your position is already drafted.

Across the whole set, tabular review shows which agreements carry which terms, and the redlines arrive as tracked changes in Word.

What comes backExample
Example output: Consultant and doctor engagement agreements
What comes backExample
Agreements read126 consultant agreements on 5 templates
Referral-linked pay8 agreements pay a share of revenue from referred imaging, flagged under the professional conduct regulations
Indemnity31 agreements have the hospital indemnifying clinical acts without a cap
Insurance19 agreements silent on professional indemnity cover
DeliverablesGrid in Excel, and tracked-change redlines in Word against your playbook

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Playbook review
Review every consultant agreement in this project against our playbook. Flag compensation linked to referrals, one-sided or uncapped indemnities, missing professional indemnity cover and patient data terms, quote each clause with its page, and redline to our positions as tracked changes.

05

Clinical trial agreements at the site

The problem

A sponsor sends a clinical trial agreement drafted for another jurisdiction. The New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules 2019 require free medical management for trial-related injury and compensation for injury or death as the Central Licensing Authority determines, and the draft caps the sponsor's liability, routes compensation through the site's insurance and says nothing about the ethics committee's registration.

The site signs as a party, and its liability for a sponsor's obligations is the question the legal team is asked to answer by Friday.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the agreement, the protocol synopsis, the insurance certificate and the ethics committee approval together, and checks each obligation against the Rules: who pays for medical management and compensation, the ethics committee's registration, trial registration before enrolment, and the site's record retention duties.

It marks the clauses that shift a sponsor obligation to the site, drafts the redline and a short note for the investigator on what the site is agreeing to.

What comes backExample
Example output: Clinical trial agreements at the site
What comes backExample
Documents readAgreement of 48 pages, protocol synopsis, insurance certificate, EC approval
CompensationClause 11 caps sponsor liability at the budget; the Rules leave the amount to the licensing authority
Medical managementClause 11.3 routes costs through the site's insurance; flagged as a sponsor obligation
Ethics committeeRegistration number not in the approval letter; asked for before signing
DeliverablesRedline in Word and a one-page note for the principal investigator

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Trial agreement review
Read the clinical trial agreement, the protocol synopsis, the insurance certificate and the ethics committee approval. Check each obligation against the New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules 2019, mark every clause that shifts a sponsor obligation to the site, and redline it.

06

Supply agreements for drugs and devices

The problem

Procurement signs supply agreements for implants, consumables and equipment on the vendor's paper. Under the Medical Devices Rules 2017 every class of device now needs a licence to import or manufacture, and drugs move only through licensed wholesalers under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act. A vendor without the right licence leaves the hospital holding stock it should not have bought.

The agreements also rarely say who manages a recall, who bears the cost, or what happens to traceability records for implants.

How Justis handles it

Justis reads the agreement with the vendor's licences and checks that the licence covers the product, its class and the premises, and is current. It tests the agreement against your procurement playbook on recall, warranty, traceability, indemnity and liability caps.

It lists what to ask the vendor for before signing and drafts the redline in Word.

What comes backExample
Example output: Supply agreements for drugs and devices
What comes backExample
ProductOrthopaedic implants, Class C devices, imported
LicenceVendor's import licence covers the knee system but not the new hip range listed in Schedule 2
RecallAgreement silent on recall cost and notification
TraceabilityNo obligation to supply lot and serial numbers for each implant
DeliverablesList of documents to request from the vendor, and a redline in Word

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Supply agreement check
Read this supply agreement and the vendor's licences. Check that each product listed is covered by a current licence under the Medical Devices Rules 2017 or the Drugs and Cosmetics Act for its class, test the agreement against our playbook on recall, traceability and indemnity, and redline it.

07

A patient data breach

The problem

The IT team reports unauthorised access to the lab system. CERT-In's 2022 directions require the incident to be reported within six hours of noticing it, and the Digital Personal Data Protection Act 2023 and the Rules 2025 add intimation to the Data Protection Board and to each affected patient as their obligations come into force.

The facts arrive in pieces: a log export, a vendor's email, a count of records that changes every hour. Someone has to keep the timeline straight while it is still moving.

How Justis handles it

Justis builds the incident timeline from the documents as they land, marks the rule each step answers to and the time it was due, and says which obligations apply today and which apply once the DPDP Rules take effect.

It reads the vendor contract for notification and indemnity terms, drafts the reports and the patient notice for your team to review and send, and keeps the record of what was known when.

StepExample
Example output: A patient data breach
StepExample
DetectedUnauthorised access noticed 12.01.2026 at 09:40, from the SOC ticket
CERT-InReport due within six hours; draft ready, facts still unconfirmed marked
Scope2,140 patient records, including lab results, from the log export
VendorLab software contract: vendor must notify within 24 hours; notified on day 3, clause 9.2
DeliverablesIncident timeline, draft CERT-In report, draft patient notice, note on DPDP duties

Illustrative example. Names, figures and dates are invented; the provisions are real.

Breach timeline
Build the incident timeline from the documents in this project, with the rule each step answers to and when it was due. Say which reporting obligations apply now under CERT-In's directions and the DPDP Act, read the vendor contract for notification terms, and draft the reports for our review.

Make it repeatable

A claim, a unit or a contract set stays in its own project. Every document you add is read as it lands, so the question asked when the matter reaches the State Commission is answered across the whole record, not the part someone attached.

When the same work comes back, save it once. A playbook carries your positions on consultant pay, indemnities and patient data; a workflow carries the steps from notice to written version; a skill carries a method, such as the way you check a consent form, and you can attach it to any message.

  • An allegation-by-allegation check for every negligence notice
  • A licence register refreshed every quarter, by unit
  • A consultant agreement playbook applied to every renewal
  • A trial agreement checklist run before the site signs
  • Committee meetings and hearings, in English or Hindi, transcribed into the file
FAQ

Common questions

Can it give a medical opinion on the standard of care?

No. It reads what the record says and sets it against the allegation, with the page on each side. Whether the care met the standard is for the clinicians and the expert you instruct, and the legal view is yours.

Which healthcare laws does it work with?

It searches the Acts, rules and regulator documents alongside the case law: the Clinical Establishments Act and the state Acts, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, the New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules 2019, the Medical Devices Rules 2017, the PC-PNDT Act, the Consumer Protection Act 2019 and the DPDP Act 2023. Each conclusion links to the provision it rests on.

Does it know which DPDP obligations apply today?

It works from the DPDP Rules 2025 and their phased commencement, and says which duties apply on the date you ask and which apply later. Where a point is unsettled, it says so rather than asserting a position.

Can it compare the Hindi and English versions of a form?

Yes. It reads both, including scans, and lists every point where the two differ, with the page for each.

Will it send the breach report or the reply for us?

No. It drafts the report, the notice or the reply. Reviewing, signing and sending stay with your team.

What should a healthcare legal team try first?

A closed negligence matter whose outcome you know. Upload the record and the notice, ask which allegations the record supports with a page for each, and compare the answer with how the matter went.

Crafted for every kind of lawyer and firm. Start using today.

Get started