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

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 library 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 project.

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.