AI workflows for legal teams
VettaLex helps legal teams turn repetitive, time-consuming work into controlled AI-enabled workflows.
Less repetitive work. More consistency. More time on the matters that actually need a lawyer’s judgment.
Legal work is full of processes that should work better
Most legal teams now have access to AI. Far fewer are seeing the gains they expected from it.
The opportunity is rarely another general-purpose tool. It is identifying the recurring processes that consume lawyer time every week, and redesigning them around the team’s own knowledge, playbooks and controls.
- Reviewing recurring agreements
- Applying internal negotiation positions
- Preparing first drafts
- Gathering information from the business
- Triaging legal requests
- Managing internal approvals
- Producing recurring transaction documents
- Handling another process specific to your organisation
VettaLex turns those opportunities into working legal workflows.
See what a legal workflow can become
Two manual legal processes, rebuilt as controlled AI-enabled workflows. They are demonstrations rather than products — the approach applies to whatever your team repeats most.
NDA review
Imagine an in-house team receiving 50 NDAs a week. Each is reviewed against the company’s preferred positions, issues identified, amendments drafted, a markup prepared.
If the average first-pass review takes 90 minutes, that represents up to 75 hours of legal time every week spent reviewing one recurring type of agreement.
Much of it is the same judgment, applied again and again:
- Is this confidentiality period acceptable?
- Can information be shared with affiliates?
- Is the employee non-solicitation provision too broad?
- Does the agreement contain an indemnity?
- Is the governing law acceptable?
- Does a provision need to be amended, escalated or left alone?
The legal analysis still matters. Performing every element of it by hand, every time, does not.
A review workflow built around a company’s actual negotiation playbook — not a model asked to “review this NDA”. Their legal positions become structured review rules.
The lawyer uploads an incoming Word NDA. The workflow then:
- Analyses the agreement against the approved playbook
- Classifies each provision green, amber or red
- Explains both the contractual and the playbook position
- Identifies priority negotiation points
- Proposes targeted amendments
- Generates a Word tracked-changes markup
The lawyer decides. The workflow removes the repetitive first pass.
It does not stop at an AI summary. Where an amendment is needed, the workflow drafts it and writes it into the agreement as genuine Microsoft Word tracked changes.
The lawyer accepts, rejects or amends each change in the usual way.
Non-Reliance Letter review
During an acquisition, a buyer wanting access to sell-side diligence reports is usually asked to sign a Non-Reliance Letter first.
The buyer’s team reviews it against their usual positions, identifies anything going beyond acceptable non-reliance protection, negotiates amendments and returns an agreed document before the report is released.
Across an active pipeline, the same analysis repeats again and again.
A separate workflow, built on a buyer-side NRL playbook.
The important part is context. An NRL exists to protect the report provider, so the workflow does not flag every provider-friendly term as a problem. It distinguishes:
- Standard non-reliance protections
- Provisions that are acceptable as drafted
- Provisions that require negotiation
- Provisions that require escalation
- Provisions that fall outside the expected scope of an NRL
From there it runs as the NDA workflow does: issues identified, rationale explained, drafting proposed, tracked-changes markup produced.
provider-friendly term
agreed positions
Standard non-reliance protection.
Expected in an NRL.
Acceptable as drafted.
Below buyer's agreed floor.
Outside expected scope of an NRL.
Acceptable as drafted.
Each negotiation point becomes targeted drafting, written back into the letter as genuine Word tracked changes with the buyer’s playbook position recorded against it.
The lawyer opens an ordinary Word document and works as normal.
The point is not the NDA or the NRL
Your team’s recurring problem may have nothing to do with NDAs or Non-Reliance Letters.
The starting point is not the technology. It is the legal process.
- Supplier agreements
- Engagement letters
- Legal intake and triage
- Recurring transaction documents
- First-draft generation
- Internal approvals
- Diligence processes
- Reporting obligations
- Playbook-based contract review
- Another workflow specific to your organisation
Four stages, starting with the process
Understand the workflow
Understand the workflow before deciding how technology should be used.
Capture the team's judgment
Legal processes rarely run on simple rules. The knowledge sits across:
- Internal playbooks
- Precedent documents
- Negotiation guidance
- Escalation policies
- Previous matters
- The experience of the lawyers performing the work
We translate that into structured rules and decision points a workflow can act on.
Build and test
A working version, built around the team’s requirements — AI combined with deterministic rules, document automation and workflow logic as the use case demands.
Tested against realistic scenarios and refined with the legal team.
Implement and improve
Once it performs reliably we help the team put it into practice, then refine it as legal positions, processes or business requirements change.
Start with one workflow
You do not need an enterprise-wide AI transformation programme. Start with one recurring workflow where the team can already see the time going. We will:
- Map the existing process
- Capture the relevant legal and commercial rules
- Build a working prototype
- Test it against realistic examples
- Establish whether there is a case for going wider
Prove tangible value on one real legal workflow before expanding.
The result is not AI for its own sake. It is a better legal workflow.
VettaLex was founded on a simple belief: the greatest opportunity for AI in legal teams is not another AI tool. It is redesigning the recurring processes around legal work.
Nic Vetta
A former City lawyer, Nic trained at Latham & Watkins and later worked in-house at the private equity firm Carlyle.
That practice covered public and private M&A, joint ventures and equity investments — document-heavy, deadline-driven work where the cost of repetition is impossible to miss, and where most of the workflows on this page come from.
What could your team automate?
If a repetitive legal process is taking more time than it should, tell us how it currently works.