DRAIP
Dispute · Resolution · AI · Platform
Case reference
Your API key (Claude / Anthropic)
Stored locally in your browser only. Never sent to our servers.
Sign in as
Claimant
Party A
Respondent
Party B
Neutral
Arbitrator
ACICA-2025-0047 Claimant — Party A
Case
Overview
Documents
AI Analysis
Settlement
Admin
Settings
Case Overview — Claimant
ACICA-2025-0047 · Construction dispute
Claim amount
$4.2M
AUD claimed
Issues in dispute
7
Identified by AI
Case strength
74%
AI assessment
Settlement zone
$2.1M
Expected value
Issue strength assessment
Breach of contract — delivery date
Strong — supported by cl.7.2 and email trail
Strong
Consequential loss — $1.4M
Moderate — cl.12 limitation may apply
Moderate
Penalty clause — $800k
Weak — likely unenforceable under Paciocco
Weak
Quantum — delay damages
Strong — supported by independent expert
Strong
Recommended actions
Address limitation clause in reply
Cl.12 caps consequential loss — argue inapplicable to your head of damage
Reformulate penalty as damages
Recast $800k as genuine pre-estimate of loss following Andrews v ANZ
File Scott Schedule response
Deadline 15 April — AI can draft from your pleadings
Documents
Your private silo — not visible to other parties
Private silo active. Documents uploaded here are processed by AI but never shared with the other party or the arbitrator unless you choose to disclose. Joint privilege applies to the AI's output under the Joint Retainer Agreement.
Uploaded documents
Statement of claim (amended)Analysed
Commercial contract — executed 12 Jan 2023Analysed
Expert report — quantum (Dr. Chen)Processing
Email chain — project manager correspondenceAnalysed
+
Upload document
PDF, Word, or text — processed privately by AI
Analyse a specific question
AI Case Analysis
Ask questions about your case — AI reads your documents
Case context (paste your pleadings or facts here)
Settlement Modelling
AI-estimated settlement range based on your case profile
Best case
$3.6M
If penalty clause upheld
Expected award
$2.1M
Most likely range
Walk-away floor
$1.2M
If limitation clause applies
Settlement strategy — describe your position
Settings
Platform configuration
AI model
DRAIP is AI-agnostic. Currently powered by Anthropic Claude. Swap any model at any time.
Data residency
All data processed in Australia (ap-southeast-2). Documents never leave Australian jurisdiction. Compliant with Privacy Act 1988.
Joint retainer agreement
Both parties and the arbitrator must execute the Joint AI Platform Retainer before documents are cross-analysed. This preserves joint privilege.
Your key · not stored on our servers
ACICA-2025-0047 Neutral — Arbitrator
Tribunal
Overview
Issue map
AI briefing
Scott Schedule
Tribunal Overview
Synthesised view — both parties' positions
Total claim
$4.2M
Issues filed
7
Common ground
2
Settlement zone
$1.8–2.4M
Positions at a glance
Party A (Claimant)
Issue
Party B (Respondent)
Breach on 14 Mar — clear email evidence
Delivery date
Force majeure — Feb cyclone caused delay
$1.4M loss — unaffected by cl.12
Consq. loss
Cl.12 caps at $400k — genuine pre-estimate
Contract validly formed Feb 2023
Formation
Agreed — no dispute on formation
NSW law, ACICA Rules apply
Governing law
NSW law, ACICA Rules — agreed
$800k penalty clause enforceable
Penalty clause
Unenforceable — Paciocco v ANZ applies
AI-estimated settlement zone
$1.8M – $2.4M
Based on 14 comparable ACICA awards 2019–2024
Documents received
Party A — statement of claimReceived
Party A — contract (executed)Received
Party B — defence & counterclaimReceived
Party B — force majeure evidenceReceived
Joint expert reportAwaited
AI Mediator Briefing
Synthesised neutral briefing from both silos
Describe the dispute (or paste both parties' pleadings)
Scott Schedule Generator
AI auto-generates from both parties' pleadings
Paste pleadings from both parties
Issue Map
All issues — agreed, disputed, and partial
2 agreed 3 disputed 2 partial
Contract formation
Both parties agree the contract was validly executed on 12 Feb 2023
Agreed
Governing law and jurisdiction
NSW law, ACICA Rules — both confirmed in pleadings
Agreed
Delivery date breach
A: breach 14 Mar · B: force majeure (cyclone) excludes liability
Disputed
Penalty clause enforceability
A: enforceable pre-estimate · B: void penalty under Paciocco v ANZ
Disputed
Force majeure scope
A: cyclone was foreseeable and cl.14 drafted narrowly · B: event squarely within cl.14
Disputed
Consequential loss quantum
A: $1.4M · B: cl.12 caps at $400k · Quantum amount partially agreed at $800k base
Partial
Delay period calculation
A: 47 days · B: 31 days (excludes mobilisation period)
Partial
Your key · not stored on our servers