Auditable AI case preparation for Employment Tribunal teams

Turn an Employment Tribunal file into a case you can see.

ClaimOS builds a source-linked chronology, brings together focused evidence-review lenses, and lets fee earners ask questions of the file. Quotation text is checked against cited pages and failures are flagged; completed evidence questions, answers and citations are retained in the matter record; and every working output stays under lawyer control.

Document-automation software for law firms. It describes what the documents say; it does not assess merits, predict outcomes, or give legal advice.

Fictional ET matterWorking file
Illustrative product view

Source-linked chronology

11 events

Proposed from the evidence. Each entry stays attached to the page it came from.

12 Jan 26
Flexible-working request sentp.3
28 Jan 26
Request declined in writingp.7
04 Mar 26
Grievance submittedp.12

Five review lenses

3 to inspect
ProceduralEvidentialConsistencyComparables

Narrow checks report gaps and conflicts. They do not produce a merits score.

Ask the evidence

“When was the first written response sent?”

The response letter is dated 28 January 2026.

response-letter.pdf · p.1Logged
Fictional data and references · no output shown here has been approved

How the AI is used

AI that stays attached to the evidence

Language models help with the parts of case preparation that require reading language. Deterministic code handles citation verification and date arithmetic. ClaimOS shows the distinction so a fee earner can inspect the work rather than take an answer on trust.

AI workflow 01

Build a source-linked chronology

ClaimOS proposes dated events from the processed file and carries the supporting passage with each one. The quotation is machine-checked against the stored page; a citation that cannot be verified is rejected rather than presented as fact. A fee earner decides what belongs in the working chronology.

Flexible-working request sent12 Jan 26A/3
Written response received28 Jan 26A/7
Grievance submitted04 Mar 26B/12
Illustrative chronology · references not approved

AI workflow 02

Use focused review lenses

Procedural, evidential and consistency checks run in the review panel, and comparable published decisions sit in their own search view. ClaimOS says where model-assisted reading, deterministic checks and public-record retrieval are used. It reports material for a lawyer to inspect — never a case score, prediction or view on merits.

Proceduraldeadline engine
Evidential1 document reference to inspect
Consistency2 conflicting accounts
Comparablespublished decisions
Illustrative review · findings require fee-earner review

AI workflow 03

Ask questions of the evidence

Ask a factual question in ordinary language and receive an answer grounded in the documents, with quotations linked back to their pages. Completed answers retain the question, answer, available citations, user and timestamp in the matter record. The tool describes the file; it refuses requests for advice, strategy, prospects or recommendations.

When was the flexible-working request answered?

The response letter is dated 28 January 2026.

response-letter.pdfquoted passagep.1

Completed answer and citation retained

Illustrative answer · question and sources retained

One file, seven stages, one source

Everything on the matter enters once and is worked through in order. Each stage leaves an artefact behind, and the chronology, the dates and the bundle are all built from the same vault, so they cannot drift apart.

InIntake

Documents and audio arrive on the matter and are logged on receipt.

Receipt log
02Transcription

Audio becomes searchable text, held against the recording it came from.

Transcript
03Evidence vault

Indexed, versioned, searchable, access-logged. The single source for everything after it.

Matter index
04Chronology

AI proposes dated events from the vault, each kept with the passage and page it came from.

Cited chronology
05Review lenses

Focused checks report procedural, evidential and consistency findings; a separate comparables view adds context.

Review findings
06Deadlines

Working shown and rule cited, for a fee earner to check.

Key dates
OutBundle

Paginated and indexed from the vault, not assembled by hand.

Hearing bundle

Illustration · every output is for a fee earner at your firm to check before it is used

Lawyer control is part of the workflow

ClaimOS produces inspectable working materials. It does not act on a finding, contact a party, or send an output outside the matter. Fee earners can follow citations back to the source, review the retained activity history, and decide what is approved for use.

What ClaimOS is not

  • Not a law firm. ClaimOS does not give legal advice.
  • Not a claims management company, and not regulated by the FCA.
  • It does not assess the merits, value or prospects of any claim.
  • It does not contact claimants, take instructions, or make or receive referrals.

Every output — every date, every chronology entry, every bundle — is working material for a fee earner at your firm to check before it is used.

Built for a firm that will be asked about it

  • The matter database is hosted in London; evidence files are stored in Western Europe. Evidence text is also processed by the AI and document services named in our privacy notice.
  • PromptWorks AI Ltd is registered with the Information Commissioner's Office, reference ZC229196.
  • Client data is not used to train models.
  • Row-level tenant isolation, enforced in the database and tested as a build gate.
  • Two-factor authentication is mandatory. Evidence views and downloads are logged, with automatic refresh polling deduplicated server-side.

Where data goes, and which sub-processors handle it, is set out in the privacy notice.

It sits alongside your case management system

ClaimOS does not replace Access, Clio, Leap or Proclaim, and does not need your accounts, billing or client ledger. It handles the evidence-heavy preparation work those systems were not built for, while the system of record stays where it is.

The arithmetic just got harder

Each of these rules now has two versions, and which one applies turns on a date in the matter — not on the date the claim is prepared. Both are stated here, with the date that divides them.

Most Employment Tribunal claims — unfair dismissal, discrimination, detriment, deductions

England, Wales and Scotland · measured from the act complained of, or the effective date of termination

Before 1 October 2026

three months less one day

ERA 1996 s.111(2)(a); Equality Act 2010 s.123(1)(a) — the period begins with the act

On or after 1 October 2026

six months less one day

Employment Rights Act 2025 Sch. 12 (commencement 1 October 2026); Employment Tribunal (Extension of Time Limits) (Miscellaneous Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Regulations 2026, SI 2026/758

The new limit applies where the problem at work happens on or after 1 October 2026; where it happens before, the three-month limit continues to apply.

As stated on GOV.UK (the source below)

Breach of employment contract

England and Wales · measured from the date of termination of the contract giving rise to the claim

Before 1 October 2026

three months less one day from termination

Employment Tribunals Extension of Jurisdiction (England and Wales) Order 1994, SI 1994/1623, art. 7

On or after 1 October 2026

six months less one day from termination

Employment Rights Act 2025 Sch. 12, as stated on GOV.UK: the change commences on 1 October 2026 for England and Wales

The trigger is the termination date, not the act complained of. In Scotland the same change commences on 9 November 2026, for terminations on or after that date.

SI 1994/1623, art. 7 (the trigger); the Scottish commencement date as stated on GOV.UK (the source below)

Acas early conciliation period

England, Wales and Scotland · measured from the date the early conciliation form is presented to Acas

Before 1 December 2025

up to six weeks

Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) Regulations 2014, Schedule, r.6

On or after 1 December 2025

up to twelve weeks

Employment Tribunals (Early Conciliation: Exemptions and Rules of Procedure) (Amendment) Regulations 2025, SI 2025/1153, regs 2–3

The conciliation period stops the limitation clock for longer, and the stop is now variable. GOV.UK states that the process for making a claim, including notifying Acas, has not changed with the October 2026 time-limit change.

Employment Tribunals Act 1996 s.207B (the conciliation period is not counted towards the time limit); SI 2025/1153 (the source below); GOV.UK — Employment tribunal time limits (last updated 30 July 2026), for the unchanged process

Every one of these is a date calculation someone has to get right, on every matter, from memory.

The time limit on any actual matter must be calculated and checked by the fee earner. The statements above describe what the published sources say at the date shown. They are information, not advice, and none of them is a calculation of any time limit. ClaimOS shows the working for each matter and cites the rule it applied; a fee earner approves it.

Time-limit statements last reviewed 3 September 2026 — source: GOV.UK — Employment tribunal time limits (last updated 30 July 2026); legislation.gov.uk — SI 2025/1153.

Illustration — the position from 1 October 2026Invented dates. Not a calculation of any actual time limit.

Most ET claims arising on or after 1 October 2026 will carry a six-month limit. The same claims arising before that date stay at three months less one day.

Matter A — dismissal15 Sep 2026

three months less one day · ERA 1996 s.111(2)(a)

Expires 14 Dec 2026

Matter B — dismissal15 Oct 2026

six months less one day · ERA 2025 Sch. 12

Expires 14 Apr 2027

NoteOne month apart, four months of difference. Acas early conciliation stops the clock on both, for a period that is itself now variable. ClaimOS shows the working and cited rule; a fee earner checks every date.

See ClaimOS working on a complete fictional matter

See the full workflow on a fictional matter, including the chronology, review lenses, evidence questions, deadline working and bundle. If it fits your practice, we can then agree the scope of a controlled pilot.