PracticeAssistant
Wall of bound legal reports inside a private law library

Authority Desk

Research support with
visible sources and careful limits.

Authority Desk helps legal teams develop research notes, procedural analysis, statutory summaries, legal tests and authority comparisons while keeping source support, assumptions and verification status visible.

Request a Research DemoSee Source Map
Authority Desk · Research note
Jurisdiction: England & Wales
Question: What is the test for unilateral mistake as to identity in face-to-face contracts?
Short answer

Face-to-face dealings raise a strong presumption that the seller intends to deal with the person physically present. Identity must be material and known to the other party.

Authorities considered
  • · Phillips v Brooks Ltd [1919] 2 KB 243
  • · Ingram v Little [1961] 1 QB 31
  • · Shogun Finance v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62
Verification status
  • Phillips v BrooksReviewed
  • Ingram v LittleNeeds verification
  • Shogun FinanceReviewed
Limitation — Authority Desk does not certify that an authority is current or binding without human verification.

Why Authority Desk exists

Legal research needs assistance,
not false certainty.

AI can help lawyers move faster through research, but legal authority still requires careful treatment. Authority Desk is designed to support research discipline by separating sourced material from assumptions, marking uncertainty and preserving areas that need human verification.

Core capabilities

A research bench with discipline.

01

Research memos

Structured notes with legal question, short answer, analysis, authorities considered and limitations.

02

Legal test extraction

Pull out the elements of legal tests, procedural requirements or statutory conditions for review.

03

Authority comparison

Compare authorities, arguments or statutory provisions side by side with visible source references.

04

Procedural notes

Prepare procedural summaries and next-step outlines, scoped to a chosen jurisdiction.

05

Verification status

Mark items as not verified, needs verification, reviewed, rejected, superseded or not applicable.

06

Source discipline

Connect outputs to Source Map so reviewers can see where support exists — and where it does not.

Example workflows

Research that survives scrutiny.

Legal issue research

  1. 1Enter the issue and jurisdiction.
  2. 2Generate a structured research note.
  3. 3Review the cited authorities.
  4. 4Send to Drafting Studio.

Authority comparison

  1. 1Identify competing arguments.
  2. 2Compare authorities side by side.
  3. 3Map distinctions and limitations.
  4. 4Flag items requiring human verification.

Procedural preparation

  1. 1Summarise procedural steps.
  2. 2Flag missing facts.
  3. 3Map next-step deadlines.
  4. 4Create a checklist for legal review.

Caution

Authority Desk supports research. It does not certify the law.

Authority Desk does not certify that any authority is current, binding or complete unless properly verified by a qualified user or connected legal database. Treat outputs as research drafts pending human verification.

Related modules

Counsel Desk

Legal reasoning workspace with sources and review discipline.

Explore →

Drafting Studio

Drafting that starts from context, precedent and review.

Explore →

Source Map

Statement-level provenance for every generated claim.

Explore →

Next step

Research faster without hiding uncertainty.

Request an Authority Desk DemoAll modules