11:47 PM · Tuesday · Hearing is Thursday
“Did they ever agree
to the liability cap?”
The answer is in this file. So are 9,138 other documents.
- 3,411
- emails, across five threads
- 812
- drafts: forty-one of them called “final”
- 1
- signed original. Nobody is certain which.
At five minutes each, that is ninety-five working days of reading. You have until Thursday.
Marlowe is where a firm’s documents live and the only thing in the building that has read all of them.
Your firm already knows.It just can’t remember.
The system
One place the documents live. One thing that has read every one of them.
Storage that files itself, and reasoning that works across the whole matter rather than one document at a time. Seven parts, one system, one invoice.
Tuesday · 14 documents reached the firm
- Client portal
- Shared drive
- E-signature
- Scanned post
- WhatsApp, clientBoard pack, March.pdffiled
- Email attachmentSPA v7 for signature.docxfiled
- E-signatureSPA, executed.pdffiled
- Scanned postAttendance note, 11 Apr.pdffiled
Six ways in, one file out. Nobody had to save anything anywhere.
Part of the same system.
The same question
“Did they ever agree to the liability cap?”
9,138 documents · 4 years · 6 systems
Yes, on 21 March, at £4m.
Your client’s board minutes record it as £2.5m.
The executed agreement says £4m, and the attendance note says the change was read aloud before signing.
Two sources disagree.
Board minutes · 28 Mar 2023“liability capped at £2.5 million”
Executed SPA · cl. 11.4“shall not exceed £4,000,000”
Nobody flagged it. It has been in the file for two years.
- 1EmailRe: SPA, remaining points
- 2DraftShare Purchase Agreement v7
- 3MinutesBoard meeting, item 6
- 4EmailRe: SPA, confirmed terms
- 5ExecutedShare Purchase Agreement
- 6AttendanceAttendance note
The chronology · written, not compiled
Four years of a matter, in the order it happened.
Marlowe reads the file end to end and lays it out as one timeline, and every time two documents close a pair, it says what nobody had noticed about them. Drag the head.
Mar 2022Sep 2026
1A clause that moved
Governing law left England between v3 and v7.
1Draft v3, cl. 24.1: “the courts of England and Wales”
1Draft v7, cl. 24.1: “the courts of Singapore”
Four drafts apart. It was never raised in a single email.
2Two accounts that cannot both be true
The same witness, on both sides of one meeting.
2Attendance sheet, 14 Nov 2022, signed in the same hand
2Witness statement, 03 Feb 2023: “I was not present”
The other side has both documents too.
3A date nobody diarised
The warranty claim expires in 34 days.
3Warranty deed, 12 Sep 2023: “within three years of Completion”
3Firm calendar: no entry, no reminder, no owner
Found in an email from 2023. Nobody had read it since 2023.
Before it goes out
Every clause, against the way your firm writes it.
Not a market standard. Yours, drawn from the agreements this firm has already signed. Three clauses in this draft do not match.
This draft
This agreement is governed by the laws of Singapore.
Your precedent · used in 231 matters
This agreement is governed by the laws of England and Wales.
Changed between v3 and v7. It was never raised in a single email.
The same check runs on everything that arrives, including the drafts the other side sends you.
The record has to exist before anyone asks for it.
The foundation
Pick a version of one clause.
Share Purchase Agreement · clause 11.4 · v5
−The Seller’s aggregate liability shall not exceed £2,500,000.
+The Seller’s aggregate liability shall not exceed £4,000,000.
Seven characters. £1.5 million of the client’s exposure.
Everyone who touched it
- 21 Mar 2023 · 14:02A. Kauredited cl. 11.4
- 21 Mar 2023 · 14:09R. Whitfieldopened · change highlighted
- 22 Mar 2023 · 09:31M. Ellisdownloaded (PDF)
- 22 Mar 2023 · 09:44J. Brightblocked · not on this matter
Written as it happened, not reconstructed afterwards. Nobody at the firm can edit this list, including whoever runs the firm.
- Permission lives with the document, not with the screen showing it.
- Encrypted where it sits and everywhere it travels.
- There is no link that works for someone outside the matter.
Price
One system. One line on the invoice.
Firms buy the place documents live from one company and the AI that reads them from another, then pay for the AI twice.
Marlowe is both. Per lawyer, per month, published rather than negotiated per deal. No implementation fee, no charge per gigabyte, and no tier where the intelligence is the upgrade.
- ConnectEmail, WhatsApp, portals, drives, e-signature, post
- FilingNamed, dated, filed to the matter on arrival
- ChronologyThe whole matter in the order it happened
- Ask the matterAnswers that carry the page they came from
- Clause checkMeasured against your own precedent
- VersionsWhat changed between any two drafts
- The recordWho opened it, who was refused, sealed
We are looking for a few firms to build the first release with.
Not a waiting list for a finished product. Everything after the first release gets decided by the firms in it.
One email when there is something to see. Nothing else, from anyone.