Review. Hosted, audited, role-based, quality-controlled.
A review is only as good as the workspace it runs in and the workflow it follows. Relativity gives us the platform. Discipline gives the result its weight.
- Phase
- 05 of 06
- Discipline
- Review
- Standard
- ACPO · ISO 27001
Plate · ReviewA review that stands up to inspection.
We host on Relativity in a UK data region, with role-based access that mirrors the matter team and its permissions. Reviewer batches are sized for concentration, not for throughput theatre. Coding decisions are captured in a structured layout, and every decision is timestamped and attributable. Privilege and confidentiality are handled by workflow, not by memory.
Review turns processed data into decisions. Relevance, privilege, redaction, confidentiality, personal data, hot documents, issue tags. Each decision is applied by a reviewer, checked by a supervisor, and audited by the platform.
The output is not merely a coded set. It is a defensible record of who saw what, when, why they coded it as they did, and how quality was measured at every step.
How review runs on our matters.
- 01
Workspace setup
Relativity workspace configured with matter-specific fields, propagation rules for families and threads, and a coding layout designed with counsel.
- 02
Reviewer onboarding
Structured induction covering the issues, the coding protocol, privilege criteria and the redaction standard. Test batches before live batches.
- 03
Batching & workflow
Batches assigned by relevance signal, custodian and language. First-pass, second-pass and QC layers, with role-based access separating each.
- 04
Privilege & redaction
Privilege log built as review progresses. Redactions applied at the document level with a documented reason. Independent QC on every privilege call before production.
- 05
Quality control
Sampled QC across reviewers, elusion testing on the not-relevant set, and reviewer agreement metrics reported to counsel weekly.
- 06
Analytics-assisted review
Where volume justifies it, continuous active learning to prioritise likely-relevant documents. The methodology is documented for later disclosure to the other side.
What review produces.
What arrives at the end of the phase, in a form the next phase, or a court, can rely on.
- Fully coded review population with propagated family decisions
- Privilege log built to the disclosure standard in play
- Redaction set with reason codes and QC sign-off
- Weekly QC metrics and reviewer agreement reporting
- Documented review protocol suitable for disclosure
- Production-ready set with all coding and holds resolved
Where review goes wrong.
The classic failures are cultural rather than technical. Reviewers batched too heavily so accuracy drops after lunch. Privilege calls made under time pressure and never QC'd. Redactions applied inconsistently across custodians. Analytics deployed as a shortcut rather than a method, with no elusion testing to prove that the not-relevant set really is. Each is a familiar reason for a re-review, and each is prevented by workflow rather than by adding more reviewers.
Continue through the workflow.
Bring us in early.
Defensibility is built, not retrofitted.
Whether you are responding to a regulator, preparing for disclosure, or scoping an internal investigation, start the chain of custody with a short, confidential conversation.