News / public record

Checking
  1. Update / Component / Scope · CheckingOLC Engine: a renewed presentation of legal workThe bilingual Engine page now presents the approved version 0.1.0 scope, its legal-work method and the boundary between current capabilities and planned expansion.
  2. Article · CheckingA Server in the Office Is Not a Security StrategyWhy an office server, cloud service, email route or encrypted backup must be assessed through capabilities, responsibility and evidence—not location alone.
  3. Article · CheckingWho Controls the Legal AI Stack?Public code can enable inspection without proving control of the whole system. Follow versions, provenance, data sovereignty, exit and regulatory roles in legal AI.
  4. Article · CheckingConfidentiality Does Not End at the Chat WindowConfidentiality is a property of the complete data path, not the chat window. What do DPAs, de-identification and local deployment solve — and why is the OLC gateway still only a concept?
  5. Article · CheckingWhen a High Score Hides a Critical Legal ErrorA high benchmark score does not establish that legal AI is dependable for every problem. This article explains how to measure critical errors, retrieval, abstention, evaluators and the path to a legal answer.
  6. Update / Component / Readiness · CheckingWord Connector public presentation is completeThe Apache-2.0 v0.1.0-beta.1 source-only release now has a complete public component record, homepage feature, Roadmap outcome and discovery path.
  7. Update / Component / Release · CheckingOpenLegalCore Word Connector v0.1.0-beta.1 is publicThe Apache-2.0 source-only beta provides a verified Word for the web path for researching Slovenian legal sources through OLC Engine, directly or through Open WebUI.
  8. Article · CheckingLegal RAG Can Fail Before the Model AnswersA genuine provision can still support the wrong answer. This article shows how collection scope, document splitting, filters and ranking determine which sources a legal AI model ever sees.
  9. Article · CheckingWhen a Correct Citation Leads to the Wrong LawA genuine provision and an official link do not prove that the right law was applied. This article explains why legal AI must preserve temporal versions, transitional rules and the source-selection path.
  10. Update / Project · CheckingPublic project foundation gate is completeOpenLegalCore has completed its public project foundation gate: core public routes, bounded participation channels and publication controls are operating.
  11. Article · CheckingAn Audit Trail Is Not a Log: What a Digital Legal Process Must PreserveAn audit trail is useful when it permits a reasonable reconstruction of the particular process while remaining purpose-bound, appropriately protected and subject to retention rules.
  12. Article · CheckingArticle 86 of the AI Act: Does the right to explanation already apply to Annex III systems?The legal question remains open. The technical capacity to provide an intelligible explanation should not.
  13. Update / Project · CheckingPrivate security reporting is now availableOpenLegalCore now provides a monitored project-wide private channel and a canonical security-reporting policy.
  14. Update / Component / Release · CheckingSlovenian Case Law Pipeline v0.1.7 is publicOpenLegalCore has published the production-verified Slovenian case-law ingestion component as a source-available BUSL-1.1 release.
  15. Article · CheckingA Result Is Not a Method: Why Visible Methods Matter in Legal AIWhy legal AI needs inspectable sources, provenance and human review: a legal and technical analysis of the EU Artificial Intelligence Act and GDPR.
  16. Update / Component / Release · CheckingSlovenian Legislation Pipeline v0.1.0 is publicOpenLegalCore has published the production-verified PISRS legislation-ingest component as a source-available BUSL-1.1 release.
  17. Update / Component / Release · CheckingLegal OCR Pipeline v0.1.2 is publicThe first public OpenLegalCore component is available with code, tests, offline review tooling and a bounded acceptance record.
Explore the code
Menu
Component register

COMPONENT 06 / PRIVATE · FUNCTIONAL ITERATION · v0.0.5

Legal Fact Extractor

A structured foundation for Case Memory.

Legal Fact Extractor is a standalone OLC component that extracts candidate records of assertions and directives from Slovenian legal text and links them to source passages. Engine 0.1.0 already includes structured extraction and persistent case memory; this private standalone component retains its own release and integration boundary.

Extracted records are not automatically verified facts. The applicable review is required before further use. Standalone integration decisions do not limit the current functions of Engine 0.1.0.

See the module What requires review
Status
PRIVATE · INCUBATION
Version
0.0.5
Licence
PARTNERSHIP TERMS
Record checked
2026-08-19
  1. 01

    Source-linked

    Candidates that pass technical validation retain exact source passages for review.

  2. 02

    Role-aware

    Allegations, denials, findings and operative orders remain distinct.

  3. 03

    Fail-closed

    Ambiguous or contract-breaking output is quarantined, not guessed.

  4. 04

    Reusable core

    Standalone now; adaptable workflow connections remain planned.

01 / ROLE

A reusable transformationbetween documents and legal work.

Legal documents carry allegations, denials, findings, events, dates, directives and references inside narrative text. The extractor creates an addressable candidate layer over that source without replacing it.

01 / OCRDocument image

becomes machine-usable text

02 / FACT EXTRACTIONLegal narrative

becomes source-linked candidate records

03 / ENGINE 0.1.0 · CASE MEMORYReviewed fact layer

Engine preserves durable matter context

The document remains the source. The fact layer makes its candidate propositions addressable.

We structure records for Case Memory. Review determines whether they are suitable for further use.

02 / MODULE

One bounded component.More than one possible host.

The standalone extraction path exists today. Interface and workflow connections express the component's intended architecture; they are not released integrations.

FUNCTIONAL CORELEGAL FACT EXTRACTOR

legal text → candidate fact records

IMPLEMENTED

Standalone extraction

One UTF-8 text input becomes one reviewable, validated JSON candidate bundle.

PLANNED

Custom document workflow

Connect extraction to the document-upload path after an explicit integration contract.

PLANNED

OLC Legal Workspace

Adapt the component for a controlled document, review and matter workflow.

INTENDED

Other legal systems

Reuse or modify the extraction contract inside compatible frontend or backend processes.

Modular means adaptable, not universally compatible. Each host still requires an explicit input contract, review path, privacy boundary and integration decision.

03 / FACT LAYER

Structured enough to use.Linked closely enough to inspect.

The current baseline writes an immutable candidate bundle containing source identity, deterministic segments, exact spans, assertions, directives, quarantined items, coverage records and provider metrics.

TECHNICALLY VALID CANDIDATE

Passes structural and source-alignment checks; substantive review is still required.

Schema
Closed and versioned
Evidence
Exact and unique span
Role
Epistemic distinction retained
Result
Review candidate

QUARANTINED CANDIDATE

Retained with an explicit failure indication, never silently repaired.

Schema
Unknown or missing field
Evidence
Missing, altered or non-unique quote
Normalisation
OCR-ambiguous numeric value
Result
Quarantined
01Document collectionSOURCE MATERIAL
02Reviewed fact layerCONTROLLED RECORDS
03Structured matter memoryENGINE 0.1.0

04 / REVIEW

Review is required before further use.

The extraction contract defines requirements for record structure and source grounding. It does not determine whether an assertion is true, what evidential weight it carries or what legal consequence follows.

01 / EXTRACT

Propose candidate records.

Assertions, directives, roles and exact evidence spans remain linked.

02 / VALIDATE

Check compliance with the technical contract.

Schema, permitted values, source alignment and ambiguity are checked fail-closed.

03 / REVIEW

Control what moves forward.

The applicable human or workflow review determines whether a candidate may be used as system context.

Extraction is not fact-finding. Grounding is not truth. Schema validity is not factual verification.

Further use in matter memory requires the applicable review. Engine 0.1.0 includes persistent case memory independently of this standalone component’s integration status.

REVIEW INTERFACE

A functional review surface exists. A verified walkthrough and screenshots will be added as separate evidence after the interface and its exact operations are documented.

05 / READINESS

The module works.The workflow boundary is still open.

The component remains private while its reusable contract, document-upload integration path, review workflow, privacy boundary and relationship to structured matter memory are designed and validated.

Functional extraction core
EXISTS
Standalone contract
FIRST ITERATION
Review surface
EXISTS · EVIDENCE TO FOLLOW
Workflow integration
NOT YET CONNECTED
Standalone document upload
PLANNED
OLC Legal Workspace
PLANNED
Standalone matter-memory path
INTEGRATION TO BE DEFINED
Repository
TRANSFER TO OLC PENDING
Access
PRIVATE
Licence
PARTNERSHIP TERMS