---
title: "MiAI Law (MiAI Law Pty Ltd)"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/software/miai-law"
type: "software_profile"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "miai-law"
vendor: "MiAI Law Pty Ltd"
category: "Legal-specific"
segment: "Legal research"
confidence: "medium"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-27"
---

# MiAI Law (MiAI Law Pty Ltd)

> Australian case law and legislation research with document-checking tools, sold to practitioners as a web subscription, with answers footnoted to pinpoint citations from the vendor's own database and the retrieval…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/software/miai-law  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-27

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

Plan covered: The miai.law subscription platform: Lite and Deep case research, legislation research, case summarisation, Contract Intelligence, LawCheck, AppealCheck, PleadingCheck. Plan tiers, usage limits and Bespoke Solutions need separate review.

Australian case law and legislation research with document-checking tools, sold to practitioners as a web subscription, with answers footnoted to pinpoint citations from the vendor's own database and the retrieval steps viewable.

## Capabilities

- Legal research
- Case-law summarisation
- Contract review and redlining
- Document summarisation
- Advice and memoranda drafting
- Citation verification

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Deployment | SaaS |
| Hosting regions | Australia |
| Australian region | Yes |
| Model providers | Microsoft Azure OpenAI |
| Assurance | ISO/IEC 27001:2022 (stated on the vendor's FAQ; certificate, certifying body, certificate number and scope not published) |
| Training on customer content | No |
| Retention | Privacy Policy clause 9 and Data Protection Policy clause 3 state data is retained only as long as necessary for the stated purposes, or longer where required or permitted by law or for legitimate business interests, and that where deletion is not possible, for example in backup archives, the data is isolated from further processing until deletion is possible. The home-page FAQ separately states uploaded source documents are automatically deleted 30 days after upload; that period appears in neither published policy. No retention period is published for prompts, generated outputs or the audit trail. |
| Integrations | Jewel Co-Pilot (named in Terms clause 9.3.1 as an example of an agent or integration provided by MiAI Law; not described on any page read) |
| Legal content coverage | Stated on the home page as Federal, State and Territory laws across Australian jurisdictions, retrieved from the vendor's own structured database of cases and legislation. Two published limits qualify it: Terms clause 5.7 states case law research relies solely on judicial precedent and the service does not confirm whether legislation cited in a case is still current, amended or repealed; clause 3.1 names a risk of 'infection', defined as legal concepts from another jurisdiction entering the interpretation of Australian law. No source list, court list, coverage start date or update cycle is published. |
| Pricing | No figure is published anywhere on the site. Terms clause 14.2 states there are several subscription plans, each with its own conditions, usage limits and features, and that additional credits may be purchased when a usage limit is reached; clause 14.1 states the subscription is for personal use only. Billing falls on the 21st of each month (clause 14.6), the subscription auto-renews (clause 15.1), payments are non-refundable except as required by the Australian Consumer Law (clause 16.1), plan changes that significantly impact the user carry at least 30 days' notice (clause 14.3) and a price rise tied to added features carries at least 15 days' notice (clause 14.7). The figures sit behind the subscriber area at app.miai.law/billing, which was not opened. |
| Australian presence | Yes. Australian contracting entity is MiAI Law Pty Ltd, ACN 678 734 766, ABN 55 678 734 766, recorded on the Australian Business Register as an Australian Private Company, ABN and GST registration active from 1 July 2024, ABN details last updated 28 February 2025, main business location NSW 2000, record extracted 27 September 2026. Governing law is New South Wales (Terms clause 17.1) and arbitration is seated in Sydney under ACICA Rules (clause 12.3), with mediation before a mediator agreed or appointed by the New South Wales Bar Association (clause 12.2). Terms clauses 10.1 and 10.2 name a second entity, MiAI Law SEZC, as co-owner of the intellectual property; nothing read states where it is incorporated, what it does, or whether it holds or can access customer data. Privacy Policy clause 6.2 and Terms clause 13.2 state personal information may be disclosed to recipients outside Australia, including India. Contact for support and privacy is support@miai.law. No registered office address was published on any page read. Named users on the home page are testimonials on the vendor's own page, not independently verified customer references, so none is recorded here. |
| Website | https://miai.law/ |

## What the research found

| Topic | Status | Finding | Open question | Sources |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Subscription plans, usage limits and credits | Public claim only | User Agreement clause 14.2 (as at 8 September 2026) states there are different subscription plans, 'each with its own conditions, usage limits, and features', and that a user reaching a plan usage limit 'may purchase additional credits to continue accessing the Service', with the detail held in the Manage Your Subscription section of the product. Clause 14.1 states 'You agree that your subscription is for personal use only.' No plan names, inclusions or figures appear on any page read; they sit behind the subscriber area at app.miai.law/billing, which was not opened. | Which plan tiers exist, what usage limit applies to each, what a credit buys, and will you licence the platform to the firm as an entity rather than on the personal-use basis in clause 14.1? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Deployment and hosting | Public claim only | Delivered as a web subscription with the subscriber area at app.miai.law; no desktop, add-in, mobile or self-hosted option appears in anything read. The home-page FAQ, checked 2026-09-27, states 'Customer account information, uploaded documents, research outputs and AI processing workloads are stored and processed entirely within Australia' and that 'MiAI utilises infrastructure hosted in Australian cloud regions'. No page read names the cloud provider hosting that Australian infrastructure. Logos including HPE, Google, NVIDIA and AWS appear on the home page under the heading 'Our Current Global Partners' with no text describing any relationship. | Which cloud provider and which Australian region host the production platform and the inference workload, and can you evidence that in the subscription documents rather than the FAQ? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) |
| Published feature set | Public claim only | The home page, checked 2026-09-27, publishes: case research in a 'Lite Mode' and a Deep mode; legislation research including interpretation and point-in-time analysis; case summarisation separating majority, concurring and dissenting judgments and ratio from obiter with judicial and paragraph references; 'Contract Intelligence' for review of agreements; and three checking tools, LawCheck ('audit legal documents for correctness, authority, and reasoning integrity'), AppealCheck and PleadingCheck. It also states 'Every query becomes part of your complete audit trail, searchable by date, document type, or jurisdiction.' These are product-page descriptions, not tested behaviour. | Which of these functions are included at the plan we would buy, and which are separately priced or part of the Bespoke Solutions line? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) |
| Jurisdictional coverage and its stated limits | Public claim only | The home page states coverage of 'Federal, State, and Territory laws' and that the platform retrieves from its own structured database of cases and legislation rather than from a language model's memory. The User Agreement narrows this in two places a firm should read together: clause 5.7 states case law research 'relies solely on judicial precedent' and that the service 'does not confirm whether the cited legislation is still current, amended, or repealed', and clause 3.1 names a risk of 'infection' defined as 'where legal concepts from a different jurisdiction is inserted into the AI's interpretation of Australian law'. | Given clause 5.7, does the platform flag when legislation cited in a retrieved judgment may have been amended or repealed, and what is the update cycle for the case and legislation database? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Licence, intellectual property and use of outputs | Public claim only | User Agreement clauses 10.1 and 10.2 state that all content and materials on the platform, and all intellectual property rights arising from or connected with the software used in the service, are and remain the property of MiAI Law Pty Ltd and MiAI Law SEZC. Clause 9.1.6 prohibits reverse engineering, probing, scraping and 'any systematic analysis of Service outputs or behaviour', and clause 11 records consent to injunctive relief for breach of it. Nothing in the Terms read grants the customer ownership of, or a licence to use, the outputs the service generates. | Who owns the outputs we generate, and what licence do we have to use them in client work given clause 5.4 restricts them to internal research? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Integrations and API | Not confirmed | No integration list, API, document-management connector or word-processing add-in appears on any page read, and the site carries no developer or documentation section. The only integration-like item found is in the Terms: clause 9.3.1 carves out from its prohibition on third-party agents 'any agent or integration provided by MiAI Law, such as Jewel Co-Pilot'. Nothing read describes what Jewel Co-Pilot is, what it connects to, or whether it is available to subscribers. | What is Jewel Co-Pilot, what does it connect to, and is there any supported API or document-management integration for uploading matter documents? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Support, service levels and complaints | Public claim only | Support and privacy contact is support@miai.law (Terms clauses 13.4 and 18.1). Privacy Policy clause 10 commits to responding to a written privacy complaint, or requesting further information, within 28 days, and notes the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner as an external avenue. Terms clause 14.6 states access suspended for non-payment is restored within 48 hours of receipt of payment. No uptime, availability or response-time commitment appears in anything read; clause 3.5 states the service is provided 'on an "as is" and "as available" basis' and clause 3.4 excludes any warranty that it will be uninterrupted or timely. | What availability target, support hours and response times will you commit to in writing, given clause 3.5 provides the service 'as is' and 'as available'? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Published quality evidence | Not confirmed | The home page carries three figures under the heading 'Real Results from Real Firms' — '3-5x' more risks, gaps and arguments identified, '100%' audit ready traceable reasoning, and '20%' more time spent on strategy — with no methodology, sample size, comparator or date attached to any of them. No benchmark, evaluation, accuracy study, hallucination rate or independent test of the platform was found on the site or in the documents read. The remaining quality material on the page is named customer testimonials, which are statements on the vendor's own page rather than independently verified references. | Publish the methodology, sample and date behind the '3-5x', '100%' and '20%' figures, and provide any accuracy or hallucination evaluation run against Australian case law and legislation with the test set used. | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) |
| Contractual restriction on how outputs may be used | Not confirmed | The User Agreement restricts the use a firm may make of the output, which bears directly on which tasks it can be used for. Clause 5.4 states AI-generated material 'is intended for internal research and exploratory purposes by legal professionals' and 'should not be relied upon as formal legal advice to clients, nor should it be directly incorporated into client communications, contracts, or court documents without thorough human verification and approval'. Clause 5.3 states summaries of cases, legislation or policies 'are a starting point for research, not a definite legal analysis'. A firm must decide, per task, whether its intended use sits inside those limits. | For each task we intend to use the platform for, does clause 5.4 permit the output to reach a client document after our own verification, and will you record that in the subscription terms? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Vendor content directing how AI systems describe the product | Not confirmed | Checked 2026-09-27 for a page or block telling AI models, assistants or crawlers how to describe the product. The home page was read in full, including the feature sections, the security and compliance section and the whole FAQ set, and contains no block addressed to AI models or crawlers. https://miai.law/llms.txt returns the site's not-found page ('It looks like nothing was found at this location.'), and no /ai-info or /for-ai page appears in the site navigation or footer. This negative is not exhaustive: a firecrawl map of miai.law returned only three indexed links, so the site is poorly indexed and pages outside the navigation may exist. | Do you publish any file or page that tells AI systems, assistants or crawlers how to describe MiAI Law, and if so where is it? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [miai.law/llms.txt (URL returns the site's not-found page: 'It looks like nothing was found at this location.')](https://miai.law/llms.txt) |
| Professional responsibility, privilege and client authority | Public claim only | The User Agreement disclaims the relationships a firm might assume. Clause 5.2 states use of the service 'does not create a solicitor-client relationship or any other professional relationship. No duty of care or legal responsibility is assumed for the content generated by the AI, and your use of the system does not give rise to any confidential or privileged client communications.' Clause 5.1 states the content is for general informational and research purposes and is not a substitute for the professional judgment of a qualified Australian lawyer. Nothing read addresses whether a firm needs client consent before uploading client material. | What does clause 5.2 mean for legal professional privilege in documents we upload, and will you confirm in writing that uploading client material to the platform does not waive privilege? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Foundation-model providers | Not confirmed | Three vendor documents describe the models differently. The home-page FAQ states 'We use Microsoft Azure OpenAI language models (LLMs) in inference-only mode.' Privacy Policy clause 1.2, which the Terms incorporate at clause 1.1, names no provider: 'We use third-party large language models (LLMs) in inference-only mode. Your data is not used to train those models... For example, if we use OpenAI's API, their policy is not to use API data for training.' Terms clause 2.1 says the service 'uses off-the-shelf large language models (LLMs), together with our proprietary legal architecture, algorithms and relevance reranking systems'. So the marketing FAQ names one named provider and deployment while the binding documents leave the provider open and give a different provider path as a conditional example. The distinction matters because the two paths sit in different regions. | Name every model provider and model deployment used at inference, state whether it is Azure OpenAI in an Australian region or the OpenAI API, and commit to notifying us before any change. | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Subprocessors | Not confirmed | No subprocessor list, and no page naming any hosting, infrastructure or support provider, was found anywhere on the site or in the documents read. The binding documents describe categories of recipient only: Terms clause 13.2 states 'We may disclose that information to third parties that help us deliver the Service (including technology suppliers, communication suppliers and our business partners) or as required by law', and that personal information may be disclosed 'to recipients that are located outside of Australia, including India'. Privacy Policy clauses 6.1 and 6.2 say the same, with Australian Privacy Principle 8 protections asserted. The absence of a named list is itself the finding. | Provide a subprocessor list naming each recipient, its function and the country it processes in, and identify specifically which recipients are located in India and what data they receive. | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Training on customer content | Public claim only | Privacy Policy clause 1.2, which the Terms incorporate at clause 1.1, states 'We do not train any AI models at Miai Law Pty Ltd or Miai Law SEZC. We use third-party large language models (LLMs) in inference-only mode. Your data is not used to train those models, and we do not retain it for that purpose.' The home-page FAQ states the same and adds 'we also do not use your data for any training purposes.' Nothing read states whether that commitment is contracted down to the model provider, and Privacy Policy clause 3.1 separately permits use of collected data for 'Enhancing the accuracy and relevance of the AI-generated responses', which is not defined. | Is the no-training commitment flowed down in your contract with the model provider, does it cover prompts and generated outputs as well as uploaded documents, and will you warrant it to us? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Service improvement, aggregation and feedback | Public claim only | Privacy Policy clause 3 permits use of collected data 'to improve our services', listing at 3.1 'Enhancing the accuracy and relevance of the AI-generated responses', at 3.2 analysis of usage patterns, and at 3.7 'To develop new features and services'. Clause 4 permits aggregation: the vendor 'may aggregate your information and use the aggregated information to analyse the effectiveness of our Services', may 'analyse the general behaviour and characteristics of users', and may share, publish or make generally available aggregated information such as general user statistics. This sits alongside the clause 1.2 statement that no models are trained, and no opt-out is offered for either use. | By what mechanism are AI-generated responses made more accurate under clause 3.1 if no model is trained, does that mechanism touch our prompts or uploaded documents, and can we opt out of clauses 3.1 and 4? | [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Retention of uploaded documents, prompts and outputs | Not confirmed | The marketing FAQ and the published policies do not say the same thing. The home-page FAQ states 'Uploaded source documents are automatically deleted 30 days after upload in accordance with MiAI's data management policies.' No such period appears in either published policy: Privacy Policy clause 9 and Data Protection Policy clause 3 both say only that data is retained 'only for as long as necessary to fulfill the purposes outlined in these terms and conditions, unless a longer retention period is required or permitted by law', that data may also be retained 'for legitimate business interests', and that where deletion is not possible, for example in backup archives, the information is isolated from further processing 'until deletion is possible'. No retention period is published for prompts, research outputs or the audit trail. | Is the 30-day automatic deletion of uploaded documents a contractual commitment, which document records it, and what are the retention periods for prompts, generated outputs, the audit trail and backups? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Deletion on request and on exit | Public claim only | Privacy Policy clause 8 and Data Protection Policy clause 2 give a right to access, correct or delete personal data held by the vendor, exercised by writing to support@miai.law, and both add 'We reserve our right to limit our facilitating such requests to that which is required by applicable law.' Neither document states a timeframe for deletion, offers certified erasure, or addresses deletion of uploaded documents, prompts, outputs or the audit trail as distinct from personal information. The Terms deal with cancellation at clauses 15 and 16 but contain no provision for deletion or return of customer data on termination. | On termination, what happens to our uploaded documents, prompts, outputs and audit trail, within what period will they be deleted, and will you certify erasure including from backups? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Vendor and provider personnel access to content | Public claim only | The home-page FAQ, checked 2026-09-27, states 'Access to customer information is strictly limited on a least-privilege basis' and that 'Only authorised personnel with a legitimate business need may access customer information, and only where necessary for platform support, security operations, or legal compliance purposes. All access is governed by role-based access controls and monitored through audit logging.' A separate FAQ answer states subscriber data 'will be segregated from the data of other subscribers in your personal server'. These statements sit on a product page; no equivalent clause appears in the Terms, Privacy Policy or Data Protection Policy, and nothing read states whether the model provider has human reviewers able to read prompts or completions. | Will you put the least-privilege and audit-logging commitments into our agreement, report access to our content on request, and confirm whether the model provider's personnel can read our prompts or outputs? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) |
| Identity and access controls available to the firm | Public claim only | Terms clause 5.6 commits to 'appropriate technical and organisational safeguards—including encryption at rest and in transit, firewalls, secure access controls, and continuous security monitoring', in compliance with Australian Privacy Principle 11, and Privacy Policy clause 7 repeats it. Terms clause 9.2 places responsibility for account confidentiality and for all activity under the account on the user, with an obligation to notify the vendor immediately of unauthorised use. Nothing read mentions single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, IP restriction, session controls or firm-level administrator roles, and no administrator documentation was found. | Is single sign-on or enforced multi-factor authentication available, and can a firm administrator provision users, set permissions and review the audit trail across the firm's accounts? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Encryption and key management | Public claim only | Terms clause 5.6 states encryption at rest and in transit; Privacy Policy clause 7 states the vendor 'actively encrypts all data and the transmission of that encrypted data both at rest and in transit, and employs additional safeguards such as firewalls, secure access controls, and regular security monitoring'; Data Protection Policy clause 1 states the same encryption position. The home-page FAQ adds that encryption uses 'industry-standard encryption technologies'. All three documents also state that absolute security cannot be guaranteed. No algorithm, key length, key management arrangement or customer-managed key option appears in anything read. | Which encryption standards are used at rest and in transit, who holds and rotates the keys, and is a customer-managed key option available? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Independent assurance | Public claim only | The home-page FAQ, checked 2026-09-27, answers 'Is MiAI Law ISO 27001 certified?' with 'Yes. MiAI Law is certified to ISO/IEC 27001:2022, the internationally recognised standard for information security management systems (ISMS)', and adds that the vendor 'conducts regular internal audits, risk assessments and management reviews'. A page heading states 'Independently audited and certified to the international standard for information security management.' The certificate itself, the certifying body, the certificate number and the scope statement were not published on any page read, and no SOC 2, IRAP, ISO/IEC 42001 or penetration-test report is mentioned anywhere on the site. | Provide the ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certificate, certifying body, certificate number and scope statement, and confirm the certified scope covers the production platform and the Australian hosting environment. | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) |
| Contracting entity, liability and forum | Public claim only | The Australian contracting entity is MiAI Law Pty Ltd, ACN 678 734 766, ABN 55 678 734 766, recorded on the Australian Business Register as an Australian Private Company with ABN and GST registration active from 1 July 2024 and main business location NSW 2000, record extracted 27 September 2026. The User Agreement is dated 'As at 8 September 2026'; clause 17.1 applies the law of New South Wales; clauses 12.1 to 12.3 set a path of informal negotiation, then mediation before a mediator agreed or appointed by the New South Wales Bar Association, then arbitration under ACICA Rules seated in Sydney. Clause 6.3 caps aggregate liability at the fees paid in the 12 months preceding the event, subject to clause 6.1 preserving non-excludable Australian Consumer Law rights, and clause 7 requires the customer to indemnify the vendor. Clauses 10.1 and 10.2 name a second entity, MiAI Law SEZC, as co-owner of the intellectual property; nothing read states where that entity is incorporated or what role it plays in the service. | Will you contract with the firm as an entity on negotiated terms, raise the clause 6.3 liability cap, and explain the role of MiAI Law SEZC, including whether it holds or can access customer data? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [Australian Business Register, ABN Lookup entity record for ABN 55 678 734 766 (MIAI LAW PTY LTD), record extracted 27 September 2026](https://abr.business.gov.au/ABN/View?abn=55678734766); [Australian Business Register, ABN Lookup active-name search for 'MiAI Law'](https://abr.business.gov.au/Search/ResultsActive?SearchText=MiAI+Law) |
| Cross-border transfers and Australian residency | Not confirmed | The residency claim and the binding documents have to be read together. The home-page FAQ states 'MiAI offers full Australian data residency' and that 'Customer account information, uploaded documents, research outputs and AI processing workloads are stored and processed entirely within Australia', using 'infrastructure hosted in Australian cloud regions'. The binding documents contain an offshore disclosure clause: Terms clause 13.2 and Privacy Policy clause 6.2 both state 'We may disclose your personal information to recipients that are located outside of Australia, including India', subject to the recipient agreeing to handle it equivalently to the Australian Privacy Principles. Nothing read reconciles the two, or states which data categories the residency statement covers and which the India clause covers. The residency statement sits on a product FAQ; no terms, data processing agreement or trust-centre document supports it. | Does the Australian residency commitment cover uploaded documents, prompts, outputs and the inference workload, will you warrant it contractually, and exactly what personal information is disclosed to recipients in India, to whom and for what purpose? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) |
| Incident notification | Not confirmed | No breach or incident notification clause was found in the User Agreement, the Privacy Policy or the Data Protection Policy, and no notification timeframe or contact path for a security incident is published. The obligation runs the other way at Terms clause 9.2, which requires the user to notify the vendor immediately of unauthorised account use or a breach of security. Privacy Policy clause 10 covers privacy complaints with a 28-day response commitment and names the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner. No incident history or status page was found on the site. | What is your contractual commitment to notify us of a security incident affecting our data, within what timeframe, and have you had a notifiable data breach since launch? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Change notice for terms, policies and the service | Public claim only | The three change clauses give different notice. Terms clause 8.1 states changes to the Terms 'will be brought to your notice for your acceptance', that continued use after notice constitutes acceptance, and that a user who does not agree may terminate without penalty within 30 days of receiving notice. Terms clause 3.3 states 'We may, from time to time and without notice, change or update the Service at our discretion.' Privacy Policy clause 11 and Data Protection Policy clause 4 both state that policy changes are 'effective immediately upon posting' and that continued use indicates acceptance. Terms clause 14.3 gives at least 30 days' notice before modifying or cancelling a subscription plan where the user would be significantly impacted, and clause 14.7 gives at least 15 days' notice of a price adjustment tied to additional features. | Will you give advance written notice of material changes to the service, the model provider and the privacy and data-protection policies, rather than relying on change without notice under clause 3.3 and effective-on-posting policy updates? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Exit, export and continuity | Public claim only | Terms clause 15.1 states the subscription renews automatically at the end of each period, that cancellation takes effect at the end of the current plan period, and that the user must cancel before renewal to avoid the next period's fee. Clause 16.1 states payments are non-refundable with no credit for partially used limits, except as required by the Australian Consumer Law, and that access continues to the end of a paid period. Nothing in the Terms or either policy provides for export of prompts, saved research, generated outputs or the audit trail, in any format, on exit or during the subscription, and no continuity or escrow arrangement is published. | In what format can we export our research history, generated outputs and audit trail before cancelling, and for how long after cancellation does that remain available? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement); [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy); [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) |
| Third-party agents and automated access | Public claim only | Terms clause 9.3 governs this in unusual detail. Clause 9.3.1 states the user must not permit 'any third-party artificial intelligence system, browser-enabled agent, autonomous or semi-autonomous agent, software robot, scraper or other automated tool (excluding any agent or integration provided by MiAI Law, such as Jewel Co-Pilot)' to access the service through the account. Clause 9.3.2 states that if it does, prompts, research questions, uploaded documents, client or matter information, outputs, usage data, metadata and inferences 'may be transmitted to, processed, stored or retained by the third-party provider, including outside Australia', and clause 9.3.3 that such processing sits outside the data-residency, security, privacy and governance controls applicable to the service. Clause 9.3.6 reserves the right to restrict, block or suspend such access, and clause 9.1.6 separately prohibits scraping and systematic analysis of outputs. | Does clause 9.3.1 prohibit our own approved AI assistants and automation from accessing the platform on our lawyers' behalf, and what is the approved route for connecting it to our document or practice-management system? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Open-web retrieval | Not confirmed | No page read states whether the service retrieves from the open web at query time. The home-page FAQ describes retrieval in the opposite direction: the platform 'retrieves from its own structured database of cases and legislation, then reasons from those primary sources', and states it does not rely on a language model's memory. Terms clause 4 notes only that the service may contain links to third-party websites provided for convenience. Whether any open-web or third-party search occurs as part of answering, and whether it can be disabled, is unstated. | Does any part of the service retrieve from the open web or from third-party sources at query time, and if so which, and can that be turned off for our account? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Agent actions and confirmation | Not confirmed | Nothing read describes the service taking actions outside its own interface: the published functions are research, summarisation and document checking, and the outputs described are answers, citations and audit reports. The one unexplained item is Terms clause 9.3.1, which names 'Jewel Co-Pilot' as an example of 'any agent or integration provided by MiAI Law' while excluding it from the prohibition on third-party agents; no page read says what it is, what it can do, or whether it acts autonomously. No confirmation, approval or action-logging design is published. | Does Jewel Co-Pilot, or any other part of the service, take actions outside the platform interface such as sending, filing or writing to other systems, and is per-action human confirmation required? | [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/); [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |
| Human review before reliance | Public claim only | The User Agreement requires it in terms. Clause 5.5 states 'Always exercise independent professional judgment when using AI outputs. All conclusions, interpretations, or risk assessments provided by the AI must be evaluated and confirmed by a qualified legal practitioner before being acted upon. The AI is a support tool, not a decision-maker, and cannot replace the expert judgment and responsibilities of human lawyers.' Clause 3.1 records a risk of 'errors, inaccuracies, "hallucinations"... and "infection"' and states the user should independently verify any information obtained. Clause 5.3 states summaries may not capture all relevant facts or nuances and directs the user to consult the full original sources, and clause 5.7 requires independent verification of the current status of all legislation mentioned. | What in-product support exists for the verification clauses 5.5 and 5.7 require, for example flagging that cited legislation may be out of date, and can a firm require a recorded verification step before an output is exported? | [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) |

## Notes

Binding and published documents read this pass: the User Agreement (as at 8 September 2026), the Privacy Policy, which the Terms incorporate at clause 1.1, and the Data Protection Policy, plus the home page in full and the About Us page, and the Australian Business Register record for the entity. The register settles the Australian identity question Phase 2 left open: MiAI Law Pty Ltd, ACN 678 734 766, ABN 55 678 734 766, NSW 2000. THE CENTRAL AUSTRALIAN FACT IS NOT SETTLED AND IS RECORDED AS A CONFLICT. The residency statement — that account information, uploaded documents, research outputs and AI processing workloads are stored and processed entirely within Australia in Australian cloud regions — appears only on the home-page FAQ. The Terms (clause 13.2) and the Privacy Policy (clause 6.2) both state personal information may be disclosed to recipients outside Australia, including India. No document read reconciles the two or says which data categories each covers. facts.australianRegion is recorded as yes because the vendor states it positively and specifically, including for the inference workload, but the evidence is a product page, not a contract, and the transfers consideration carries the conflict. There is no data processing agreement, subprocessor list, trust centre or security page anywhere on the site, and no cloud provider is named for the Australian infrastructure. THREE FURTHER CLAIMS REST ON THE FAQ ALONE, with no supporting published document: ISO/IEC 27001:2022 certification (no certificate, certifying body, number or scope), the 30-day automatic deletion of uploaded documents (absent from both policies, whose retention wording is open-ended), and the least-privilege, role-based access and audit-logging statements. NOT REACHED, and each matters: https://miai.law/legal-disclaimers-and-indemnity, which is a named terms-of-service document and the one remaining binding page unread; the cookie policy; the product pages at miai.law/miai-solutions and miai.law/bespoke-solutions; and pricing, which sits behind the subscriber area at app.miai.law/billing. Four firecrawl operations were spent on this product — the llms.txt check and three on the Australian Business Register to establish the ACN — which is the cap, so those pages were left for a later pass. CAPABILITIES under-describe the product. legal-research, case-law-summarisation, contract-review-redlining and document-summarisation are carried forward from Phase 2 unchanged. Neither LawCheck, AppealCheck and PleadingCheck (auditing a finished document against the law) nor the generation of reasoned legal analysis has a value on the controlled list; both gaps are reported in the return value, not invented here. No people's names are recorded from the About Us or testimonial content. Capability list updated 2026-09-27 when the controlled vocabulary was extended from 19 to 38 values: added advice-memo-drafting, citation-verification. Values already present were kept, because they remain true descriptions of what the product does.

## Sources

- [MiAI Law home page: feature list, security and compliance section, 'Real Results from Real Firms' figures and full FAQ set](https://miai.law/) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [MiAI Law User Agreement (Terms and Conditions, marked 'As at 8 September 2026')](https://miai.law/user-agreement) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [MiAI Law Privacy Policy](https://miai.law/privacy-policy) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [MiAI Law Data Protection Policy](https://miai.law/data-protection-policy) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [MiAI Law About Us page (company, approach and team page)](https://miai.law/about-us-2/) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Australian Business Register, ABN Lookup entity record for ABN 55 678 734 766 (MIAI LAW PTY LTD), record extracted 27 September 2026](https://abr.business.gov.au/ABN/View?abn=55678734766) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [Australian Business Register, ABN Lookup active-name search for 'MiAI Law'](https://abr.business.gov.au/Search/ResultsActive?SearchText=MiAI+Law) (checked 2026-09-27)
- [miai.law/llms.txt (URL returns the site's not-found page: 'It looks like nothing was found at this location.')](https://miai.law/llms.txt) (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.