Constitution
Rights, powers and public institutions. Start with the available source text and verify the provision in context.
A legal authority and an earlier organisational position answer different questions. NyayaDesk helps you find both, without confusing public law with private matter knowledge.
Discuss your workspaceThe subjects a litigation team returns to. These headings introduce the subjects, not a claim of source coverage.
Rights, powers and public institutions. Start with the available source text and verify the provision in context.
Find the procedural source behind the next step. Check the applicable text before relying on a proposition.
Separate what the record proves from what still needs support. Return to the underlying passage.
Explore questions of authority, process and public decision-making through available legal sources.
Frame the research question, examine relevant authorities and retain their verification status.
Keep the legal proposition distinct from the employment record. Review both before drafting.
Locate relevant provisions and inspect the matter record separately. Coverage depends on enabled sources.
Search the available corpus, inspect passages and save authorities to a matter for human review.
Bring checked research into the response. Keep citations and unsupported propositions visible to the reviewer.
Use source-linked research alongside your matter workflow. Always check current court requirements independently.
A question, a passage, a checked proposition. The research workflow, step by step.
Begin with the proposition you need to test, not the answer you hope to find.
Keep public legal authorities separate from private organisational records. Access to one does not grant access to the other.
Text and semantic retrieval help locate relevant material in the enabled corpus.
Available sources vary by workspace. A missing result is not proof that no authority exists.
Open the underlying source. Read the words around the cited passage before relying on a proposition.
A citation should lead the reviewer back to the relevant passage, not just the document title.
Inspect the verification state. An authority that cannot be verified must remain visibly unverified.
Check relevance, currency and applicability yourself. A generated answer does not replace professional judgment.
Search authorised litigation records for related matters and earlier organisational positions.
Private matter knowledge is permission-filtered. It remains distinct from the public research layer.
Retain useful authorities with the matter so the team can return to the source during review.
Keep the question, proposition and supporting passage together when developing the response.
Legal AI and Ask this case use the available context to help answer a matter-specific question.
Streaming answers are labelled while checking is underway. Citations and retained versions support review.
A proposed task, reminder or evidence request waits for explicit human confirmation.
Review the source, verify the proposition and confirm the next action. The person remains responsible for the decision.
Inspect an earlier position inside authorised matter knowledge, then return to the source. Public authorities remain a separate research layer.
What supports our position on receipt?
The source records sending. Acknowledgement evidence is still missing.
The earlier response asserted dispatch only. No claim of receipt was made without supporting evidence.
Prior response · paragraph 6Private matter knowledge remains separate from public legal authorities.
Dispatch and receipt are separate facts.
Notice, response and correspondence remain source-linked.
Receipt evidence is still missing.
Fictional examples, not live matter records.
Research combines text and semantic retrieval over the available corpus. Results carry passages, locators and verification states, so an unverifiable authority is never dressed up as verified.
The Law Library brings legislation and the available judgment collection into a dedicated reader. Search, categories and reading controls help you move from discovery to the text itself.
Related matters show why a record is relevant. Search your organisation’s authorised litigation history and examine prior positions before developing a new response.
Legal AI and Ask this case answer in context. After independent checking, proposed tasks, reminders and evidence requests become available for a person to confirm.
Explore NyayaDesk for your organisation’s records, people and review process.
Talk to usYes. It retrieves relevant material within the user’s authorised litigation records. Public legal authorities and private matter knowledge remain distinct, with source passages and verification states available for review.
Read the access boundaries