---
title: "eDiscovery Collab with Claira AI document review in Nuix Discover (eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184))"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/software/ediscovery-collab"
type: "software_profile"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "ediscovery-collab"
vendor: "eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184)"
category: "Legal-specific"
segment: "eDiscovery and litigation"
confidence: "medium"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-27"
---

# eDiscovery Collab with Claira AI document review in Nuix Discover (eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184))

> Australian and New Zealand eDiscovery provider that hosts and operates a third party's prompt-driven AI document-review tool inside Nuix Discover, and supplies implementation, prompt design and quality control on each…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/software/ediscovery-collab  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-27

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

Plan covered: Claira AI document review as resold and operated by eDiscovery Collab inside Nuix Discover in Australia and New Zealand, as published 2026-09-27. The AI is built by Noticia Solutions Inc. and the platform by Nuix; both need separate review.

Australian and New Zealand eDiscovery provider that hosts and operates a third party's prompt-driven AI document-review tool inside Nuix Discover, and supplies implementation, prompt design and quality control on each matter.

## Capabilities

- eDiscovery document review
- Document classification
- Document summarisation
- Chronology building
- Data extraction
- Translation
- Agentic workflows

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Deployment | SaaS, On-premises |
| Hosting regions | Australia, Canada |
| Australian region | Yes |
| Training on customer content | No |
| Retention | Document content: no retention, on contractual terms. The AI vendor's Terms of Use effective 6 April 2026, read 2026-09-27, state at 5.3 'Noticia does not retain Customer Data outside of the active processing session. Documents submitted to the Service are processed and the results are returned to Customer's environment. No copies are stored, indexed, or maintained by Noticia after processing is complete.' Its Privacy Policy of the same date states at 4.1 'Customer Data submitted for AI review is processed in real time … Noticia does not retain, store, cache, or index Customer Data after processing is complete.' Metadata is a different position and is retained: 'Operational metadata - including billing records, scan history, and configuration data - is stored as necessary to operate the Service', with no period given. Scan history includes prompt text and run results by case, so the retention question that remains open is about the metadata, not the documents. eDiscovery Collab's own privacy policy, last updated 2 April 2023, contains no retention period for matter data of any kind. |
| Integrations | Nuix Discover (user-interface extension; all on-premises versions and all SaaS versions per the AI vendor), Nuix Neo Discover, Stripe (activation and billing, per the AI vendor) |
| Pricing | The Australian provider publishes no price. Its own FAQ read 2026-09-27 states 'Claira pricing depends on the volume of documents being reviewed and the scope of your matter. We provide clear transparent cost estimates before any work begins', with a cost-estimate request form. The AI vendor publishes its own structure on its page for AI systems, read 2026-09-27: three ways to buy — per-case 'on a sliding scale, starting at $49 per month', organisation-wide at 'a single annual rate covering all matters', and 'Bring your own AI' at 'a flat annual rate for customers running Claira against their own models or their own infrastructure'. Consumption is per document: 'A token is one document processed by Claira', with extracted text at 1 token, visual review 2, multi-step review 3 and raw PDF or image review 5 tokens per document, Agent Mode at 1 token per message, and 'Classic single-field document review scans are always free on every plan'. The currency of the $49 figure is not stated, the figure is published by the AI vendor rather than by the Australian provider, and how the provider's own implementation, prompt-design and quality-control work is charged is not published. |
| Australian presence | Yes. CONTRACTING ENTITY AS PUBLISHED: 'eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184)', given in that form in both the privacy policy and the website terms of use read 2026-09-27. It is an ABN, not an ACN, and no company name with a corporate suffix, no ACN and no registered office address is published on either page; a Brisbane telephone number, (07) 3210 1810, appears in the site footer. The website terms of use state 'The laws of Queensland, Australia, govern these Terms', which governs use of the website rather than any services engagement. AUSTRALIAN HOSTING: the provider's FAQ states 'your documents are hosted onshore in Australia on NEXTDC infrastructure' and, of the AI tool, 'Claira operates fully within the Nuix Discover environment and all data resides within Australia'. That is a marketing FAQ, and it is contradicted in part by the AI vendor's own binding privacy policy, which states 'The Service runs on infrastructure hosted in Canada' and 'The Service is primarily hosted in Canada' — see the transfers consideration, which records the conflict. The AI vendor separately publishes 'data residency options in Canada, Australia, the United States, and the European Union' and states 'In Australia and New Zealand, Claira is delivered through an exclusive partnership with eDiscoveryCollab'. WHERE INFERENCE RUNS IS NOT ESTABLISHED: nothing read states the country of the model endpoint that classifies the documents. The provider's privacy policy consents in advance to offshore disclosure of personal information and states 'We do not require the overseas recipients to comply with the APP and we will not be liable for a breach of the APP if your personal information is mishandled.' No Australian customers are named on the pages read. |
| Website | https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/ |

## What the research found

| Topic | Status | Finding | Open question | Sources |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Who supplies what, and who you would contract with | Public claim only | Three vendors sit in this chain and only one of them is Australian. eDiscovery Collab supplies Australian hosting, implementation, prompt design, matter support and quality control; the AI is Claira, and its own page states 'Claira is developed by Noticia Solutions Inc.'; the review platform is Nuix Discover. The provider's page read 2026-09-27 states 'Claira is advanced AI document review, available exclusively through eDiscovery Collab in Australia and New Zealand', and the AI vendor confirms the arrangement from its side: 'In Australia and New Zealand, Claira is delivered through an exclusive partnership with eDiscoveryCollab.' eDiscovery Collab builds none of the AI. | Which entity would we contract with for the AI component, and does that contract flow the AI vendor's data commitments through to us? | [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| What the tool does | Public claim only | The AI vendor's page read 2026-09-27 publishes the workflow and the feature set, and the provider's page matches it. Workflow: write a plain-language prompt or start from a template, 'Test it against a single document and read the confidence score and reasoning before committing', then 'Launch a bulk scan. Results write directly into existing Nuix Discover fields in real time.' Named components are Single-document review, Bulk Scan, Case Context (five sections, with 'an admin approval workflow' controlling what is active), Agent Mode, Multi-Code Mode ('A single scan can populate up to 8 Nuix fields at once'), Connect Fields and a billing report. Supported workflows published include relevance review with confidence scoring, privilege screening 'solicitor-client, attorney-client, litigation, common interest, settlement', objective coding, PII identification, chronology generation, summarisation, translation and summarised translation, fact extraction and confirmation, event identification, quotation extraction, people extraction, quality-control review comparing AI output to human coding, and quantum-of-damages extraction. The provider's page adds image analysis and handwritten-document review. | Which of these workflows are enabled in the environment you would run for us, and which templates have you tested on Australian matters? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Deployment and where the tool sits | Public claim only | The AI installs into the customer's existing platform rather than moving data: 'Claira installs as a UI extension inside Nuix Discover, so reviewers prompt and code from a pane in the Nuix workspace they already use - no data migration, no separate platform, no retraining', and it is 'Compatible with all versions of Nuix Discover on-premises and all SaaS versions of Nuix Discover.' Three delivery models are published by the AI vendor: Managed, 'a hosted service, with data residency available in Canada, Australia, the United States, and the European Union'; On-premises, 'available for air-gapped and classified environments, with bring-your-own-model (BYOM) support'; and 'Bring your own AI'. Separately, the provider states a firm need not hold Nuix at all: 'If you currently use another litigation database, eDiscovery Collab's senior-led team can still access Claire's AI functionality within Nuix Neo Discover and overlay the results directly into your existing database' — the provider's page uses the spelling 'Claire' in that sentence. | In our engagement, which of the three delivery models applies, and if you overlay results from your own Nuix environment, who holds our documents while that happens? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Integration surface | Public claim only | Integration is confined to Nuix Discover on the published material. Fields are connected from within the tool — 'Authorized users connect Nuix Discover fields directly from the Claira settings panel - no extra export step' — while 'Case activation, extension deployment, and Nuix field creation still involve administrators.' The AI vendor also publishes a bundle for firms without the platform, and names Stripe for activation and billing. No integration with a practice-management or document-management system is published, and no API is described on the pages read; the AI vendor's help centre, which it names as the canonical documentation, was not read within the credit budget. | Which Nuix Discover versions have you deployed the extension against, and does anything leave the Nuix environment other than to the model endpoint? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Support model | Public claim only | Support is the Australian provider's stated contribution. Its page read 2026-09-27 publishes implementation and setup inside the client's Nuix Discover environment, prompt design where 'Claira's inbuilt prompt generator translates them into effective review prompts behind the scenes' and the provider's team 'then refines and tests those prompts for your specific matter', matter support throughout, quality-control validation of AI output against human coding, and ongoing training. No hours, response targets or escalation path are published, and the AI vendor's own support route is an email address and a help centre. | What are your support hours and response targets for a Claira run that fails or produces inconsistent coding mid-matter? | [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Published performance and cost figures | Public claim only | Both vendors publish figures and neither publishes a method. The AI vendor's page read 2026-09-27 gives 'Thousands / hour' throughput, '~$0.10 / doc against roughly $1 per document for traditional review', '50%+ reduction in overall review cost' and '97% agreement with senior reviewer coding on validation samples', with the qualifier 'Validation sets show 98% precision and recall. Figures are typical, not guaranteed. Throughput and accuracy vary with model, prompt complexity, document size, and load.' The provider's page gives 'Review up to 10x faster', 'Cut review costs by 50% or more' and 'Claira processes up to 10,000 documents per hour'. No validation set, corpus, matter type, date or independent assessment is published for any of these figures. The design feature that a firm can test itself is published: a single-document run returns a confidence score and written reasoning before any bulk scan, and single-field scans are free. | What were the validation sets behind the 97% agreement and 98% precision and recall figures, and will you run a documented validation on a sample of our own matter before we rely on a bulk scan? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Matters the provider puts it to | Public claim only | The provider names three client types and the matter types for each: law firms in 'large-scale litigation to regulatory responses to investigations'; in-house teams to 'interrogate large document collections quickly, identify PII for breach responses, support internal investigations and produce chronologies'; and insolvency practitioners, to 'identify key transactions, communications and relationships faster, supporting asset recovery, investigations and regulatory obligations'. Its FAQ states the tool 'is designed for the full range of legal review tasks including investigations, regulatory responses, internal reviews, arbitration and insolvency matters.' | On which Australian matter types have you run bulk scans to date, and what did the quality-control comparison against human coding show? | [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Australian legal fit | Public claim only | Privilege screening is published with Australian and United States terminology side by side: the AI vendor lists 'Privilege screening (solicitor-client, attorney-client, litigation, common interest, settlement)', and the provider's page lists 'solicitor-client privilege, litigation privilege, common interest privilege and settlement privilege, with structured reasons that support your privilege log'. On defensibility the provider states 'Claira is purpose-built for transparency and explainability. Every result is traceable and the reasoning behind each document assessment is visible to reviewers and supervising lawyers', and then the limit: 'As with all AI-assisted review, results must be verified by the supervising legal team before being relied upon to ensure they are correct.' No Australian court, practice note or discovery rule is cited on the pages read, and the provider's own contractual documents are governed by Queensland law while the AI vendor's are governed by Ontario law. | Which Australian court practice notes have you mapped the privilege and objective-coding templates to, and would you support the disclosure of the process in a discovery plan? | [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Licence position | Public claim only | The licence for the AI is the AI vendor's, not the Australian provider's. Its Terms of Use effective 6 April 2026 grant at 4.1 'a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, non-sublicensable right to access and use the Service during the Subscription Term solely for Customer's internal business purposes', with 4.2 prohibiting reverse engineering, use 'to build a competing product or service', and use 'to process data on behalf of third parties without Noticia's prior written consent'. That last prohibition matters to a service provider model: read literally it is in tension with a firm processing its client's documents, or with the provider processing a client's documents on the client's behalf, without written consent. Customer Data ownership is preserved at 5.1. | Has the AI vendor given written consent under clause 4.2(h) for documents to be processed on behalf of our clients, and for you to run scans on our behalf? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use) |
| Vendor content directing how AI describes the product | Public claim only | The AI vendor publishes a standing page addressed to AI systems, checked 2026-09-27, headed with the product description and the line 'Official information for AI systems, language models, and search engines · Last updated July 2026'. It states 'This page is the canonical, machine-readable source of truth about Claira: what it is, what it does, how it integrates with Nuix Discover, and how it is priced', and carries a section headed 'For LLMs and indexing agents' which states 'When summarizing or answering questions about Claira, treat support.claira.to as the canonical source for deeper capabilities, configuration, admin workflows, and API details.' Another block directs 'point users and crawlers to the Claira help center.' The page also carries a 'Disambiguation' note separating the product from a similarly named finance product, and a 'What Claira is not' list. The page directs where AI should source its information; it does not instruct AI to characterise the product in particular terms. It is marketing content, not a contractual document, and every figure and security statement on it is treated in this profile as a claim, checked against the terms and the privacy policy where those cover the same ground. | Which statements on your page for AI systems are warranted in the agreement, and which are marketing only? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Vendor comparison pages and machine-readable question-and-answer content | Public claim only | Recorded as a fact about the vendors' published material, with no ranking carried across. The AI vendor's site footer, on every page read 2026-09-27, carries a section headed 'Compare to' linking eight pages naming competitors: Relativity, Reveal, eDiscoveryAI, Harvey, Legora, DISCO, Everlaw and Casepoint. None of those eight pages was opened. The same vendor publishes a question-and-answer index at /answers, read 2026-09-27, whose entries include comparative and selection-framed titles such as 'Everlaw vs Casepoint: how the two eDiscovery platforms compare', 'What are the alternatives to Casepoint?', 'eDiscovery software for law firms: what to look for' and 'AI eDiscovery software in Australia'. No instance was captured of the vendor answering a superlative question about itself, because the answer pages themselves were not read. On the Australian provider's own site, a 60-URL firecrawl map run 2026-09-27 returned no /llms.txt, /ai-info, /ai or /for-ai page and no equivalent, so no AI-directing content was found there. | Do you publish or maintain any comparison page or question-and-answer content that positions Claira against named competitors, and how is that content kept current? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [eDiscovery Answers — Claira question-and-answer index](https://www.claira.to/answers); [Firecrawl site map of ediscoverycollab.au, 60 URLs, searched for ai, llms, privacy, terms, about, security and data residency pages](https://ediscoverycollab.au) |
| Authority to put client documents through the AI | Public claim only | The AI vendor puts the warranty squarely on the customer. Its Terms of Use effective 6 April 2026 state at 5.5 'Customer represents and warrants that it has all necessary rights, consents, and authority to submit Customer Data to the Service and that doing so does not violate any applicable law, regulation, or third-party rights.' The Australian provider publishes nothing on the point: its privacy policy and website terms of use, both last updated 2 April 2023, predate the AI offering, address only website use and personal information, and contain no clause about client matter documents, confidentiality of client material or informed consent. | What written record of client authority do you expect us to hold before a bulk scan, and will you accept a confidentiality undertaking covering our clients' documents? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/); [Terms of use — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/terms-of-use/) |
| Which model, and whose | Public claim only | That third-party models are used is contractual; which ones is not published. The AI vendor's Terms of Use state at 9.4 'The Service utilizes third-party large language models and other technologies. Noticia makes no representations or warranties regarding the performance, accuracy, or availability of such third-party components.' Its Privacy Policy states at 4.5 that 'Customer Data may be processed by third-party infrastructure and model providers as necessary to deliver the Service.' No model, model family, version or provider is named on any page read, and the country in which inference runs is not stated. The vendor does publish that a customer may supply its own: an on-premises option 'with bring-your-own-model (BYOM) support' and a 'Bring your own AI' plan 'for customers running Claira against their own models or their own infrastructure'. Whether either is available through the Australian channel is not published. | Which model and provider performs the classification for an Australian case, in which country does that inference run, and is bring-your-own-model available through you? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Subprocessors | Public claim only | A subprocessor position is published but not a list. The AI vendor's Privacy Policy states at 4.5 'Customer Data may be processed by third-party infrastructure and model providers as necessary to deliver the Service. These sub-processors are contractually bound to obligations of confidentiality and data protection consistent with this Privacy Policy. Noticia selects sub-processors that offer zero data retention and no model training on customer inputs. A current list of sub-processors is available upon request.' It is therefore on request, not published, and no notice obligation before a change is stated. The named third parties elsewhere in the chain are Nuix, for the platform, NEXTDC, named by the Australian provider as the data-centre operator, and Stripe, named by the AI vendor for activation and billing. eDiscovery Collab publishes no subprocessor list of its own. | Please provide the current subprocessor list with each party's country and role, and commit to notice before you add or change a model provider. | [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Training on customer content | Public claim only | This is committed in the contract, not only in marketing. The AI vendor's Terms of Use state at 5.4 'Customer Data is never used to train, fine-tune, or improve any machine learning models. Each processing interaction is ephemeral and isolated.' Its Privacy Policy repeats it at 4.2 and adds at 4.3 'Customer Data is not used for analytics, benchmarking, product development, or any purpose other than delivering the Service to the Customer that submitted it', and at 4.5 that subprocessors are selected to offer 'zero data retention and no model training on customer inputs'. The Australian provider's FAQ states the same in plainer words: 'your document content is never used to train or fine-tune AI models.' The commitment is given by the AI vendor; it is not in any document published by the Australian provider. | Will the no-training commitment in the AI vendor's clause 5.4 be flowed through to us in whichever contract we sign with you, and does it bind the model provider by name? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Use of corrections, prompts and usage data | Public claim only | Two distinct rights are reserved over things that are not document content. The AI vendor's Terms of Use state at 6.2 'Any feedback, suggestions, or ideas provided by Customer regarding the Service (“Feedback”) may be used by Noticia without restriction or obligation of any kind. Customer hereby assigns to Noticia all right, title, and interest in any Feedback.' At 6.3 it states 'Noticia retains all rights in any aggregated, anonymized, or de-identified data derived from use of the Service (“Usage Data”), which may be used for analytics, benchmarking, and service improvement. Usage Data will never include Customer Data or any information that could identify Customer or its clients.' Prompt text is not addressed by either clause, and prompts are retained as part of scan history under the operational-metadata carve-out. | Is prompt text Customer Data, Usage Data or neither under your terms, and can prompt libraries developed on our matters be used for any other customer? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy) |
| Retention of documents and of metadata | Public claim only | Documents are covered and metadata is not. Terms of Use 5.3: 'Noticia does not retain Customer Data outside of the active processing session … No copies are stored, indexed, or maintained by Noticia after processing is complete.' Privacy Policy 4.1 repeats it for real-time processing and then carves out metadata: 'Operational metadata - including billing records, scan history, and configuration data - is stored as necessary to operate the Service.' Its retention section adds 'Operational metadata such as billing records, scan history, and configuration is retained as needed to operate and support the Service', with no period. The provider's own FAQ states 'It does not retain document content after processing'. The Australian provider's 2023 privacy policy sets no retention period for anything. | How long is scan history kept, does it include the prompt text and per-document results, and can it be purged at the end of a matter? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Deletion on request and at the end | Public claim only | Deletion of document content is largely answered by there being no retention of it. On termination the AI vendor's Terms of Use state at 12.4 'Upon termination, Customer's access to the Service will cease immediately. Noticia has no obligation to retain any Customer Data following termination.' Its Privacy Policy gives individuals a right to 'request deletion of your personal information, subject to legal and contractual obligations' through a support email. No deletion right, timeframe or certificate is published for operational metadata, scan history or configuration, and the Australian provider publishes a deletion right only over personal information it holds, 'subject to applicable laws' and only to information 'being held by us at the time your request is received'. | Will you delete scan history and configuration for a matter on written request, within a stated number of days, and certify it? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/) |
| Who can read the documents | Not confirmed | Two access routes need a decision, and one is the Australian provider's own staff. First, the AI vendor limits what it says to non-document data: 'Account information, billing data, and support communications may be accessed by Noticia personnel in Canada.' No statement covers whether its personnel can read document content, which sits alongside a no-retention commitment rather than an access commitment. Second, the provider's own model involves its people in the review: it supplies prompt refinement and testing, quality-control validation of AI output against human coding, and, for firms not on Nuix Discover, 'eDiscovery Collab's senior-led team can still access Claire's AI functionality within Nuix Neo Discover and overlay the results directly into your existing database'. The provider's privacy policy permits disclosure to 'our employees and contractors' and to 'third parties, including agents or sub-contractors', with no confidentiality undertaking specific to client matter documents. | Which of your personnel and contractors will have access to our documents, under what named confidentiality obligations, and is that access logged and reportable to us? | [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/) |
| Access control and who can launch a scan | Public claim only | The platform's own controls are stated to carry through: the AI vendor's Privacy Policy states at 4.4 'For Customers accessing the Service through Nuix Discover, the document security policies of the Customer's Nuix environment continue to apply.' On top of that the vendor claims 'Authentication via signed Nuix UIX tokens validated on backend API routes' and 'Sensitive credentials injected at runtime from managed secret stores', and publishes two administrative gates: 'Authorized users connect Nuix Discover fields directly from the Claira settings panel', and for Case Context 'an admin approval workflow controls what is active'. Its Terms of Use place credential responsibility on the customer at 2.2 and liability for authorised users' breaches at 2.3. Nothing read states which Nuix permission is required to launch a bulk scan or whether that can be separated from ordinary review rights. | Which Nuix Discover permission launches a bulk scan, and can we restrict scan launching and field write-back to nominated administrators? | [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use) |
| Encryption | Public claim only | In transit is stated; at rest is not. The AI vendor's Privacy Policy states at 4.4 'Customer Data in transit is encrypted using industry-standard protocols (TLS 1.2 or higher)', and its security section lists 'encryption of data in transit (TLS 1.2+)'. Its page for AI systems repeats 'TLS 1.2+ encryption for all data in transit.' No encryption-at-rest statement appears on any page read, for the operational metadata that is retained or for anything else, and no key-management position is published. The Australian provider's privacy policy of 2 April 2023 refers only to 'suitable physical, electronic and managerial procedures' and states 'We cannot guarantee the security of any information that is transmitted to or by us over the Internet.' | What encryption applies at rest to the operational metadata and scan history you retain, and who holds those keys? | [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/) |
| Independent assurance | Public claim only | No certification is evidenced. The AI vendor's page for AI systems lists 'SOC 2 aligned.' among its security bullet points; 'aligned' is not a certification or an attestation, and no report, auditor, period, scope or trust centre is named on any page read. Its Privacy Policy refers to 'regular security assessments and vulnerability management' without naming an assessor. The Australian provider makes its assurance statement about its data-centre operator rather than about itself or the AI: 'your documents are hosted onshore in Australia on NEXTDC infrastructure, one of Australia's leading and most trusted data centre providers. NEXTDC holds the highest available data centre certifications and is certified across a comprehensive suite of international standards.' No certification is named, and a data-centre certification is not an assurance over the AI service. No IRAP assessment or ISO/IEC certification is claimed by either vendor on the pages read. | Is there a SOC 2 Type II report for the AI service, with what scope and period, and will you provide it and the bridge letter under NDA? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| The documents that would actually govern the engagement | Public claim only | Three documents were read and none of them is a services agreement from the Australian provider. eDiscovery Collab publishes website terms of use and a privacy policy, both last updated 2 April 2023 and both confined to use of its website: the terms state 'eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184) … operates this website' and 'The laws of Queensland, Australia, govern these Terms', and the 60-URL site map returned no master services agreement, engagement terms, service schedule, DPA or security page. The AI vendor's Terms of Use effective 6 April 2026 are a binding agreement — 'These Terms of Use (“Terms”) constitute a legally binding agreement between you (“Customer” …) and Noticia Solutions Inc., an Ontario corporation' — governed at 13.1 by 'the laws of the Province of Ontario and the federal laws of Canada', with exclusive jurisdiction in Ontario courts at 13.2, liability capped at 10.2 to fees paid in the preceding twelve months, and no liability at 10.3 'for any decision, action, or outcome based on outputs generated by the Service'. | What is your services agreement for an eDiscovery and Claira engagement, and do we contract only with you under Australian law or also directly with the AI vendor under Ontario law? | [Terms of use — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/terms-of-use/); [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Firecrawl site map of ediscoverycollab.au, 60 URLs, searched for ai, llms, privacy, terms, about, security and data residency pages](https://ediscoverycollab.au) |
| Where the data actually sits | Not confirmed | Three published statements do not agree, and the difference matters for an Australian matter. The Australian provider's FAQ, read 2026-09-27, states 'your documents are hosted onshore in Australia on NEXTDC infrastructure' and 'Claira operates fully within the Nuix Discover environment and all data resides within Australia.' The AI vendor's page for AI systems states it serves teams globally 'with data residency options in Canada, Australia, the United States, and the European Union', which frames Australia as one option among four. The AI vendor's own binding Privacy Policy, effective 6 April 2026, states at 4.4 'The Service runs on infrastructure hosted in Canada' and at 8 'The Service is primarily hosted in Canada … By using the Service, you consent to the transfer and processing of such information in Canada, subject to applicable Canadian privacy laws.' The privacy policy is the binding document and it names Canada without qualification. Separately, the country in which the model endpoint runs is not stated anywhere. The provider's own privacy policy consents in advance to offshore disclosure and states 'We do not require the overseas recipients to comply with the APP and we will not be liable for a breach of the APP if your personal information is mishandled.' | Will you state in the contract that our documents and all inference on them remain in Australia, and reconcile that with the AI vendor's privacy policy statement that the service is hosted in Canada? | [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/) |
| Breach notification | Not confirmed | No notification obligation was found from either vendor. The AI vendor's Privacy Policy lists 'incident response procedures' among its safeguards and says nothing about notifying a customer, to whom, or within what time; its Terms of Use contain no incident clause. eDiscovery Collab's privacy policy and website terms of use, both last updated 2 April 2023, contain no breach-notification clause, and the 60-URL site map of its site returned no security page, status page or vulnerability-disclosure page. Neither vendor publishes a reference to the Notifiable Data Breaches scheme. | Within how many hours of becoming aware of an incident affecting our matter data will you notify us in writing, and how does that sit with our own obligations under the Notifiable Data Breaches scheme? | [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy); [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Firecrawl site map of ediscoverycollab.au, 60 URLs, searched for ai, llms, privacy, terms, about, security and data residency pages](https://ediscoverycollab.au) |
| Exit | Public claim only | The structure helps and the notice period is short. Because Bulk Scan 'Results write straight back into Nuix Discover fields in real time', the coded output sits in the customer's own review platform rather than in the AI vendor's system, and there is no document content held to retrieve. The AI vendor's Terms of Use allow either party to 'terminate these Terms for convenience upon thirty (30) days' written notice' at 12.2, provide at 12.3 for immediate termination on an uncured material breach, non-payment or insolvency, and state at 12.4 that access 'will cease immediately' with no obligation to retain Customer Data. Nothing published covers export of prompt libraries, Case Context or scan history on exit, and eDiscovery Collab publishes no exit or transition terms at all. | On exit, can we export our prompt library, Case Context and scan history, and what happens to a matter mid-scan if the AI vendor terminates for convenience? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Firecrawl site map of ediscoverycollab.au, 60 URLs, searched for ai, llms, privacy, terms, about, security and data residency pages](https://ediscoverycollab.au) |
| Connectors and reach | Public claim only | The reach published is the case, not the firm. The tool is 'a UI extension inside Nuix Discover', reads the documents in the activated case, and writes to Nuix fields the customer connects; Multi-Code Mode can 'populate up to 8 Nuix fields at once'. Case Context is supplied deliberately by the team in five sections — Parties and People, Description and Timeline, Relevance and Issues, Privilege Indicators, and Collection Details — and is 'shared across the case'. Agent Mode is described as 'scoped to your case'. No connector to a mailbox, file share, practice-management or document-management system is published, and Stripe is named only for activation and billing. | Is the extension's reach limited to the activated case, and can one case's Context or agent thread reach documents in another? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| Web or external retrieval | Not confirmed | Nothing read describes internet retrieval, and nothing read rules it out. Agent Mode is published as 'grounded in your case context, in a secure persistent thread', and the translation workflow is described as detecting language and producing English-language summaries rather than calling an external translation service, but no page states whether any template or the agent can reach content outside the case. The AI vendor's 'What Claira is not' list addresses platform scope and retention rather than retrieval. | Can Agent Mode, or any template, retrieve anything from outside the activated case, and can external retrieval be disabled by configuration? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) |
| What the AI writes, and what gates it | Not confirmed | AI output is written into the system of record automatically, which is the design the firm has to accept or constrain. 'Launch a bulk scan. Results write directly into existing Nuix Discover fields in real time', up to eight fields in a single pass, with confidence scores and written reasoning alongside. Three published controls sit around it: a free single-document test run with confidence score and reasoning before committing; tasks that 'can be paused and resumed' with filterable history; and an admin approval workflow over Case Context. Agent Mode goes further than coding — it 'runs review tasks, answers questions about the matter, surfaces patterns across reviewed documents' in a persistent thread. Nothing published describes an approval step between a completed scan and the write-back, a staging field, or a documented way to reverse a scan that coded a set incorrectly. | Can scan results be staged for approval before they write to Nuix fields, and what is the documented procedure to reverse a bulk scan? | [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |
| Human review of the output | Public claim only | Required in the contract and repeated in the marketing. The AI vendor's Terms of Use state at 9.3 'Customer is solely responsible for reviewing and validating all outputs' and at 10.3 'Customer acknowledges that the Service is an AI-assisted tool and that its outputs require professional human review. Noticia shall have no liability for any decision, action, or outcome based on outputs generated by the Service.' Its page for AI systems states 'Claira does not replace human review. It augments it. All results require professional verification.' The Australian provider states 'As with all AI-assisted review, results must be verified by the supervising legal team before being relied upon to ensure they are correct', and publishes its own quality-control step: 'We apply QC review processes to validate AI outputs against human coding, surface discrepancies and ensure your review decisions are traceable and defensible.' A quality-control template that compares AI output to human coding is a published workflow. | What sampling rate and acceptance threshold do you apply in your quality-control comparison against human coding, and do we receive that comparison in writing for each bulk scan? | [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use); [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai); [Claira \| eDiscovery Software \| eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) |

## Notes

Five firecrawl operations, at the cap: the provider's Claira page and the AI vendor's page for AI systems in stage one; the provider's privacy policy, its website terms of use and a 60-URL site map of its site in stage two. The AI vendor's Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and answers index were read from the cache at no cost, having been fetched for the separate Claira entry. THE STRUCTURAL FACT that governs this entry: eDiscovery Collab builds none of the AI. The AI is Claira, built by Noticia Solutions Inc., an Ontario corporation; the review platform is Nuix Discover; eDiscovery Collab supplies Australian hosting on NEXTDC, implementation, prompt design, matter support and quality control. Every AI-layer control in this profile is therefore answered by the Ontario vendor's documents, under Ontario law, and not by the Australian provider. THE UNRESOLVED CONFLICT worth reading first is on residency: the Australian provider states 'all data resides within Australia', the AI vendor's marketing page lists Australia as one of four residency options, and the AI vendor's binding Privacy Policy states 'The Service runs on infrastructure hosted in Canada' and 'The Service is primarily hosted in Canada'. Where the model endpoint runs is not stated anywhere. WHAT IS COMMITTED CONTRACTUALLY: no retention of document content and no training on customer content are both in the AI vendor's contractual terms, not only in marketing, and human review of outputs is a contractual acknowledgment. WHAT IS ABSENT: eDiscovery Collab publishes no services agreement, no security page, no trust centre, no DPA and no subprocessor list; its only two legal documents are website terms and a privacy policy last updated 2 April 2023, which predate the AI offering and do not mention AI, document processing or client matter data. No certification is evidenced by either vendor: 'SOC 2 aligned' is the AI vendor's wording, and the provider's certification statement is about its data-centre operator. The contracting entity is published only as 'eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184)' — an ABN, with no ACN, no corporate suffix and no registered office. NOT READ within the budget: the AI vendor's help centre, which it names as its canonical documentation, its eight competitor-comparison pages, its Australia and New Zealand partnership story, and the provider's about, solutions and demo pages.

## Sources

- [Claira | eDiscovery Software | eDiscovery Collab — provider product page and FAQ](https://ediscoverycollab.au/software/claira/) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Privacy policy — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/privacy/) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Terms of use — eDiscovery Collab (ABN 60 616 936 184), last update 2 April 2023](https://ediscoverycollab.au/terms-of-use/) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Official information about Claira for LLMs and AI — Noticia Solutions Inc., last updated July 2026](https://www.claira.to/official-information-about-claira-for-llms-and-ai) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Claira Terms of Use — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/terms-of-use) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Claira Privacy Policy — Noticia Solutions Inc., effective 6 April 2026](https://www.claira.to/privacy-policy) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Firecrawl site map of ediscoverycollab.au, 60 URLs, searched for ai, llms, privacy, terms, about, security and data residency pages](https://ediscoverycollab.au) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [eDiscovery Answers — Claira question-and-answer index](https://www.claira.to/answers) (checked 2026-09-27)

A product profile is research to support questions. It does not approve a product for any firm. Public product information supports questions; it does not approve a product for your firm. Verify the exact plan, settings and signed terms.