Conformity - Your data, your rules
LitSavant Ltd - Thinking outside the box ...

LitSavant Conformty Engine - Technical Specification

The LitSavant Conformity Engine is a standard Relativity application. As such, it is installed from an xml file.  The LitSavant Conformity Engine is supported on Relativity version 7.3 and higher.

When installing into Relativity version 7.3 you will only be able to load the application by using the Relativity Desktop Client.  You will also need system administration privileges.

When installing into Relativity version 7.4 you can load the application using the Relativity Desktop Client or via the web interface on the applications tab.  After the application has been installed for the first time in any given Relativity instance it will also be available for installation in a workspace via the application library.  As with version 7.3 you will need system administrator privileges to perform the initial installation.

Once the LitSavant Conformity Engine has been installed there is no additional technical specification for running it other than that it needs to operate under a user account with system administrator privileges.

The internal architecture of the LitSavant Conformity Engine includes familiar Relativity Objects (Views, Fields and Layouts) as well as some custom Objects and Rules.  Taken together these objects store the parameters for the logical operations that the user wants the system to do.  A series of Event Handlers then go ahead and actually execute those operations.

Metadata
Properties of an electronic file, some of which will be internal and some external, not all of which are necessarily visible when viewing that file.
Key word search
It is unfortunate that this dispute about the extent of the key word search comes to Court after the Defendants acted unilaterally in choosing key words and conducting a search ...
Mr Justice Morgan (Oct 2008)

more ...
Key word search

It is unfortunate that this dispute about the extent of the key word search comes to Court after the Defendants acted unilaterally in choosing key words and conducting a search. In acting unilaterally, and in disregarding the clear advice in Part 31 Practice Direction, the Defendants have exposed themselves to the risk that the Court will conclude that their search was inadequate and that the Court should order the Defendants to carry out a further search.

Mr Justice Morgan (Oct 2008)
Digicel (St. Lucia) Ltd & Ors v Cable & Wireless Plc & Ors [2008]
EWHC 2522 (Ch) (23 October 2008)

© 2018 LitSavant Ltd. All rights reserved.