---
title: "Run the due-diligence committee inquiry list against the file"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/capital-markets-and-securities-ecm-dcm-and-disclosure/run-the-due-diligence-committee-inquiry-list-against-the-file"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A4-T1-R3"
practice_area: "Capital Markets & Securities — ECM/DCM and Disclosure"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Run the due-diligence committee inquiry list against the file

> Map DDC questions to supplied answers and source documents, and list unanswered items, inconsistencies and statements in the offer document that lack a verification note.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/capital-markets-and-securities-ecm-dcm-and-disclosure/run-the-due-diligence-committee-inquiry-list-against-the-file  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Capital Markets & Securities — ECM/DCM and Disclosure](https://ailawframework.com/practice/capital-markets-and-securities-ecm-dcm-and-disclosure.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Map DDC questions to supplied answers and source documents, and list unanswered items, inconsistencies and statements in the offer document that lack a verification note. |
| What the lawyer must review | Source every verification note in a primary document Leave the decision that due diligence is complete to the committee |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer-led judgement**

The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes summarising source material and identifying points for review. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.
- Restriction: The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Check the specialist’s assumptions, qualifications and limits. Obtain the relevant expert or specialist review before relying on a technical conclusion.
2. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
3. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/practice/capital-markets-and-securities-ecm-dcm-and-disclosure/run-the-due-diligence-committee-inquiry-list-against-the-file/united-states.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*