Corporate and M&A
The data room reads itself. You still decide what it means.
Load the data room into the matter, run the Due Diligence Agent, and get a red-flag memo tied to the clause it came from, with every authority checked.
| Document | Governing law | Term | Return of information |
|---|---|---|---|
| NDA: Counterparty A | Verified "This Agreement is governed by English law." | Verified | Needs a check |
| NDA: Counterparty B | Verified | Verified | Needs a check |
| NDA: Counterparty C | Verified | Verified | Needs a check |
An M&A due-diligence grid: documents down the side, questions across the top, the clause quoted behind each cell.
The day this changes
Before
Two hundred documents arrive on a Friday and the SPA is due Wednesday. Finding the change-of-control clause in the fourteenth contract means opening the fourteenth contract.
Diligence scales badly. Fees are quoted on deal value, the work is priced in associate hours spent confirming that most contracts say nothing interesting.
A general assistant will tell you a case supports your warranty position and give you a citation. The citation may not exist.
After
The Due Diligence Agent reads the data room inside the matter and returns change-of-control triggers, consent restrictions and unusual termination rights, each quoted against the document it came from.
The same run comes back as a Work-Stream Memo for the deal team or a one-page Executive Brief for the board, bottom line first.
Every authority arrives with a verdict, so the partner supervises the output instead of re-reading the room.
Grounded on the matter
Open the matter with the client, the reference and the responsible partner, and the conflict check runs on open. Load the data room into it, and the Due Diligence Agent works only from those documents. It reads the customer contracts, the leases and the board minutes that are actually in the file, so a finding always points back to a page you can turn to.
See how matters workClient
Calder & Finch LLP
Reference
CF-2026-0184
Practice area
Employment
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Responsible partner
R. Okafor
Status
Open
Conflict check on open: clear across 214 matters searched.
Clear- Matter opened: conflict check run automatically.
- Documents added: employment contract, board minutes.
- Contract Agent run completed: 6 action items, 14 authorities.
A matter timeline with the conflict check that runs when the deal file opens.
A deliverable, not a chat
The seeded M&A Due Diligence playbook puts documents down the side and questions across the top: document type, counterparties, change-of-control, material obligations, termination triggers, red flags. The same run also writes a Word memo the partner can sign, shaped for the board or the deal team. What comes back is a report you can send, not a transcript you have to rewrite.
See the review grid| Document | Governing law | Term | Return of information |
|---|---|---|---|
| NDA: Counterparty A | Verified "This Agreement is governed by English law." | Verified | Needs a check |
| NDA: Counterparty B | Verified | Verified | Needs a check |
| NDA: Counterparty C | Verified | Verified | Needs a check |
A review grid with each finding quoted against the contract and clause it came from.
Verified, then shareable
Every authority the run relies on is fetched from a closed list of free primary-law sources and marked verified, needs a check, or not found. Read the ledger, accept the findings you agree with, then send a passcode link to the other side or the client with every view logged on the matter. The record of who saw what is written as you go.
See how verification works| Authority | Where | Source | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employment Rights Act 1996, s.1 | Statutory particulars | legislation.gov.uk | Verified |
| Working Time Regulations 1998, regs 13 and 13A | Clause 4 | legislation.gov.uk | Verified |
| Tillman v Egon Zehnder Ltd [2019] UKSC 32 | Clause 9(c) | supremecourt.uk | Verified |
| Herbert Morris Ltd v Saxelby [1916] AC 688 | Clause 9(a) | N/A | Not found |
| ICO: monitoring workers guidance | Clause 11 | ico.org.uk | Needs a check |
| Equality Act 2010, s.39 | Clause 12 | legislation.gov.uk | Needs a check |
The authorities behind one run, each carrying a verdict before you rely on it.
A due-diligence run over fifty documents costs about 2,340 credits, about £23.40. The figure is observed on the matter, not a saving claim.
See pricingObjections
Our COLP will not sign this off.
Sources are a closed list, every citation carries a verdict, and every run, share and check sits on a register you can export or print as an inspection bundle.
See the audit registerWe already have Copilot.
A general assistant answers from the open web and will cite a case that does not exist. This works from a closed list of primary law and marks each authority verified, needs a check, or not found.
See how verification worksOur documents are confidential.
Files sit in Microsoft Azure UK, encrypted in transit and at rest, scoped to the matter, and never used to train a model. The security statement sets out the detail.
Read the security statementRun the Due Diligence Agent on one of your own data rooms.
Twenty minutes, and we will grid a sample deal so you can see the memo first.