Use case LEGAL: Two contracts that knew nothing of each other
A framework agreement, eleven call-offs, a service level and a data processing agreement — and a liability cap that reads two different ways.
An IT service provider and its largest client had worked together for four years: a framework agreement, eleven call-offs, a service level agreement from the second year, and a data processing agreement tightened after a privacy audit. Each document had been carefully negotiated on its own and reviewed by lawyers. Then a system was down for six hours, and the question of liability met two answers: the framework agreement capped it at the annual fee, while the service level provided for a penalty per commenced hour — with no cap and no reference to the framework agreement.
The biggest obstacle was not the contradiction itself. It was that nobody could look for it: contract sets are reviewed document by document, because a person cannot read four texts at once. A contradiction between documents arises precisely where no individual review looks — and it reliably surfaces only once it costs money.
Aigis checks the documents of a contract set against each other and names the colliding clauses with their citation: clause, paragraph, wording, on both sides. For liability, both provisions sat side by side, together with the framework agreement's order-of-precedence clause, which did not fit this case. Here too the platform does not decide which clause prevails — that is a legal question and it belongs to the lawyer. Aigis makes sure it reaches them BEFORE the incident rather than after.
The difference is one of timing, not of substance: the same question, six months earlier, costs an hour of advice instead of a dispute. The documents stayed the same. They were simply read, for the first time, by something that had all four open at once.
The situation described is composed, not that of a specific customer. The mechanism described is the one Aigis actually applies.