Case files in consumer tools
Pasting a pleading into a free chatbot takes seconds. What happens to that text afterwards is something nobody at the firm can explain to a client or the bar.
Law firms and notaries
A client confides in you because it stays with you. Any tool that sends case file text to an outside party puts that at stake, however clever the tool. werqly runs AI on a node that belongs to your firm alone: documents are processed in-house, walled off per practice group, and every processing step is in an audit log you can show a client or the bar.
Running on your firm’s node
Role: Employment practice group
Safeguards active
Insight: anonymous (default)
werqly Node — your own AI node, in your own server room
The risk
Pasting a pleading into a free chatbot takes seconds. What happens to that text afterwards is something nobody at the firm can explain to a client or the bar.
Every lawyer picks their own tool. The firm does not know which models are used, for which matters, or whether the output was checked.
An AI policy on paper helps little if you cannot show how it is followed in practice.
Benefits
AI running on your own node changes case work without giving up anything on confidentiality.
Summarising, comparing and drafting take less time. The lawyer keeps the time for advice and the matter itself.
When a client, the bar or an auditor asks, you can show where processing happened and who had access.
No sprawl of tools per lawyer. One set of rules, configured per practice group and enforced firm-wide.
Earlier opinions and templates become findable for those authorised, instead of gathering dust in folders.
Use cases
Automations are built per firm, usually following from the TIMA Scan. The lawyer or notary always checks the result.
Lengthy pleadings, correspondence and exhibits summarised, with references to the source.
Deviations from your standard clauses or an earlier version marked before the lawyer reviews them.
Searching data rooms for unusual clauses, change of control and liability.
First versions of letters, memos and pleadings in your firm’s style.
Earlier opinions, templates and precedents searchable, only for those authorised.
For notaries: collecting details from documents and staging draft deeds for the notary.
AI security and governance control
werqly AI Control gives the partners and the IT lead the controls to steer AI use and account for it.
Groups from your identity provider decide who may use which sources, models and automations.
National IDs, client numbers and other patterns are blocked per role before they reach a model.
Who, what, which model and which source, timestamped. Exportable for the compliance officer or the bar.
Anonymous by default: trends per practice group, never traceable to a lawyer. Per user only with four-eyes approval.
Which model version processed which document can always be traced. The basis for your AI policy and the AI Act.
Every automation has an owner, a version and a bounded set of sources. It can be switched off at once.
Regulation
The duty of confidentiality existed long before AI. The question is always the same: who gets to see the text? werqly does not make the use of AI permissible by itself, but it makes the answer to that question your own firm.
| Framework | What it asks | How werqly fits |
|---|---|---|
| Professional secrecy and legal privilege | What a client shares in confidence stays confidential, including towards software suppliers. National bar rules set the details. | Processing on a node that belongs to your firm alone. No shared environment and no external model vendor receiving the text. |
| Bar guidance on generative AI | Bar associations increasingly expect a firm-wide AI policy, oversight of use by staff, verification of output and control over data flows. | AI Control sets per role which models, sources and automations are allowed. The audit log and insight policy make oversight demonstrable. |
| GDPR, including criminal offence data (Art. 10) | A lawful basis, purpose limitation and appropriate security. Criminal offence data only under strict conditions. | Safeguards block patterns such as national ID and client numbers per role. You set the log retention period. |
| EU AI Act: AI literacy (Art. 4) | Organisations using AI must support the AI literacy of the staff who use it. Since the 2026 Digital Omnibus this is a duty to support, not a guaranteed level. | One console shows who uses which models and for what: a starting point for targeted training. |
This page is not legal advice. Always assess the use of AI with your own data protection officer, compliance function or professional body.
Recommended setup
For firms we recommend your own server room with werqly Pro management: case files are then processed only on your own premises, and werqly keeps the node up to date remotely. Firms without a server room can choose werqly Cloud: a dedicated node in a locked rack in our European datacentres.
Enter your work email and number of employees. We work out four setups for you straight away: in your own server room or in our datacentre, self-managed or with werqly Pro management. werqly is not a cheap AI subscription: you pay for your own hardware and full control.
Working out the proposals…
Your node in your own server room or rack
No server room? A locked rack in our EU datacentre
werqly Pro management
We operate the node and the models
— per month
—
werqly Pro management
We operate the node and the models
— per month
—
Self-managed
Your IT department operates it; we supply software and updates
— per month
—
Self-managed
Your IT department operates it; we supply software and updates
— per month
—
Indicative amounts, excluding VAT. Custom automations are quoted separately. Only the quote is binding.
FAQ
Not by itself. The duty of confidentiality does not forbid software, but requires that you do not share confidential information with third parties unnecessarily and that you take appropriate measures. An external AI service that receives and stores case file text is hard to justify on that basis. On a node that belongs to your firm alone, the text stays within the firm.
In most European jurisdictions, yes, provided it is done responsibly. Bar guidance, such as the 2025 recommendations of the Dutch bar, asks for a firm-wide AI policy, oversight, verification of output and control over data flows. The lawyer stays responsible for checking the result; werqly gives the firm the means to set that policy and evidence it.
No. Prompts, documents and output are processed on your firm’s node. The management link to AI Control carries configuration, updates and only the insights you choose to release, never case content.
Yes. In AI Control you connect groups from your identity provider to models, sources and automations. A practice group then sees only the sources released to it.
That depends on your national bar rules. Where there is no general duty, transparency is often still advisable, especially when AI plays a large role or affects confidentiality or cost. Record it in your AI policy and inform clients about that policy.
May a lawyer use ChatGPT for client files? What professional secrecy and bar guidance on AI (CCBE, NOvA, BRAK, CNB) require, and how a firm uses AI responsibly.
Read the article →How a notary’s office uses AI without breaching its duty of secrecy. What the Dutch notarial guidance asks, which tasks AI does well and which environment fits.
Read the article →Private AI means language models run on infrastructure that belongs to your organisation alone. What it is, which forms exist and when it is the right choice.
Read the article →Patient data, national hosting rules and medical confidentiality: AI that runs in your own server room.
View the sector →Client data, DORA and the AI Act: AI whose location you can evidence.
View the sector →Residents’ data, algorithm registers and the AI Act: AI you manage yourself.
View the sector →A no-obligation quote for your own AI node, in your inbox within a minute.
Request a quote →