Build the record
Organise the source set into a reviewable chronology, issue map and evidence register.
Lawyer-controlled dispute decision support
From a contested record to a recommendation the lawyer can test.
PLATO organises the record, develops a candidate legal and commercial position, tests the counter-case, and gives the responsible lawyer a source-linked recommendation to adopt, amend or reject.
PLATO supports professional judgment; it does not replace the responsible lawyer.
The decision problem
More organised material is useful. A reviewable position is more valuable.
In a consequential dispute, the buyer is not purchasing a chronology for its own sake. The buyer needs to know which position is supportable, what could defeat it, what is missing, and what the responsible lawyer recommends doing next.
PLATO makes that reasoning inspectable. It connects each proposed conclusion to the record, exposes adverse evidence and keeps the final professional decision human.
How it works
Evidence first. Recommendation second. Lawyer decision last.
Develop a candidate recommendation
Frame the position, its factual basis, its legal dependencies and the decision it supports.
Attack the counter-case
Surface adverse evidence, credible rebuttals, missing facts and conditions that could change the position.
Put judgment back with the lawyer
The responsible lawyer can adopt, amend or reject the candidate recommendation and record why.
Decision brief
What the responsible lawyer receives.
Draft decision-support material for professional review—not advice issued by PLATO.
Candidate legal and commercial position
Strongest counter-case and rebuttal
Source-linked chronology and issue map
Material evidence gaps and contradictions
Conditions that could change the recommendation
Next actions for lawyer and client review
Inspect before you enquire
Project Atlas / synthetic governance and funding disputeOpen the decision brief See the reasoning shape, not a feature list.
The public example is synthetic. It shows a candidate recommendation, counter-case, source links, uncertainty and the lawyer-control boundary without exposing client data.
Decision Advice Sprint
Start with one bounded decision.
A pilot is scoped around one decision question and one agreed source set. Transfer, access, confidentiality and review controls are agreed before matter material is received.
One consequential decision question
One agreed source set
One decision owner
One responsible lawyer
One review deadline
No public document upload