This guide explains why lawyers should test search terms before agreeing them, detailing the measurements, sampling methods, and negotiation strategies involved.
Guide · 17 pages · 20 min read · Published 2026-08-30
Agreeing a list of unvalidated search terms exposes UK legal practitioners to inflated processing costs and undetected evidence. Written for solicitors and litigation teams navigating Practice Direction 57AD, this overview explains how running preliminary tests transforms subjective negotiations over the Disclosure Review Document into precise mathematical analysis. It addresses the practical and technical mechanics of measuring hit counts, precision, overlap, and null results, alongside statistical sampling techniques that quantify what a proposed list captures. It details how elusion testing evaluates data left behind, while establishing methods for auditing an opponent's list and examining wider source architecture across technical data layers. By reviewing worked scenarios, technical limitations, and common mistakes, the text equips practitioners with targeted interrogatories for clients, opponents, and e discovery providers, complete with proposed wording for search protocols. Ultimately, it demonstrates how spending two hours on testing prevents six figure expenditure, providing actionable checklists, red flag indicators, and clear guidance on when to instruct a digital forensic examiner to ensure defensible, proportionate disclosure.
Read this guide on your phone, browse guides by topic or go back to the full PDF library.
17 pages · 20 min read
Lawyers must test search terms to avoid signing a list they have not run, transforming search negotiation from adjectives into arithmetic.
Published by Computer Forensics Lab on 2026-08-30. Original material of the practice, free to read, cite and download. The authority behind this subject is Practice Direction 57AD, Disclosure in the Business and Property Courts, which you should read alongside this guide. See every guide's author and source.
Prefer a PDF that matches this page exactly? Download the current text as a PDF, generated from the current wording of the guide, including any later corrections.
SEARCHTERMTESTING · A GUIDE FOR UK LAWYERS Why Lawyers Should Test Search Terms Before Agreeing Them Hit Counts, Sampling and the Two Hours That Save Six Figures COMPUTER FORENSICS LAB
17 pages · 21 min read
Learn to design effective and defensible keyword searches for e-discovery.
17 pages · 22 min read
Technology-Assisted Review (TAR) amplifies human judgement by ranking documents.
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.
