{"id":"AIBD-0989","title":"The High Court in London declined to revisit Musst's technology assisted review of 175,723 documents, seeing no likely basis to object to its cost","summary":"In April 2020 the High Court in London faulted Musst for not announcing its technology assisted review of 175,723 documents but found no likely basis to object to its cost.","date_observed":"2020-04-22","date_basis":"source publication","date_precision":"day","benefit_status":"mixed","source_collection":null,"source_entry":null,"account":"In a business dispute between Astra and Musst, Musst gave disclosure under the disclosure pilot of the Business and Property Courts. Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723. Because of that volume, its then solicitors applied two types of technology assisted review, predictive coding and clustering analytics. They explained the steps over some three pages of the disclosure statement. Astra raised the use of technology assisted review in its applications. On 22 April 2020 Chief Master Marsh held that Musst should have notified Astra, and he called the omission a failure of process. He added that, in all probability, Astra could have had no proper basis to object once the estimated cost had been provided. He declined to revisit the point. The judgment does not state the cost or describe the software, and the court did not test the review.","category":"benefit created","unexpected":false,"purpose":"A vendor that the judgment does not name built the predictive coding and clustering analytics software to predict which documents are relevant and to group similar documents for review.","system":"Technology assisted review by predictive coding and clustering analytics","model_version":null,"developer":"Not named in the judgment","deployer":"Musst, with its then solicitors Bird & Bird","location":"London, United Kingdom","domain":"Legal services / e-discovery","segment":null,"benefit_type":"Reduced Task Cost","work_activities":["4.A.2.a.2","4.A.1.a.1"],"taxonomy_note":null,"registry_ids":{},"ratings":[{"group":"organizational","depth":1,"reason":"Musst gave disclosure from 175,723 documents with technology assisted review, and the court let it stand on an estimated cost that the judgment does not state."}],"ai_role":{"status":"unassessed","statement":"The court did not examine the review or compare it with keyword searches alone. The judgment names predictive coding and clustering analytics, but it does not describe the software or state the cost."},"evidence":[{"kind":"court document","citation":"High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Business List (ChD) (Chief Master Marsh). Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch), judgment of 22 April 2020, paras 32 to 38. Find Case Law copy.","title":"Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch)","url":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","date":"2020-04-22","written_by":"independent","quote":"In all probability, had they been so informed there could have been no proper basis for objection once the estimated cost of using technology assisted review had been provided."}],"replication":{"produced_by":["Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723.","Musst's then solicitors applied predictive coding and clustering analytics because of the volume.","The disclosure statement explains the review steps over some three pages."],"must_hold":["A party that intends to use technology assisted review tells the other party and tries to agree on the approach.","The other party receives the estimated cost of the review."],"echoes":[]},"paired_incident":null,"headline":"London court declines to revisit Musst's *TAR* of 175,723 documents","metric":"175,723 documents","comparator":null,"later":null,"value":null,"developer_country":null,"deployer_country":"British Virgin Islands","unrated_because":null,"brief_notes":null,"brief":null,"revisions":[{"date":"2026-11-01","change":"Added the record from the finding of the High Court of England and Wales.","source":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","editor":"AIBD"}],"confidence":"found","shade":"high","claim_status":"Found by a court","claim_basis":"Sources: one independent court document. The cited evidence includes no independent study or report.","case_jurisdictions":["United Kingdom"],"profile":{"case_id":"AIBD-0989","catalog_version":"1.0.0","source_fingerprint":"e53bcd42c37a79030efd5a3ee8ebb0e053ad7fa336270cf5660387e11db70c37","collection_refs":[{"collection_id":"aibd","version":"2026-10-31"},{"collection_id":"querist","version":"2026-10-25"}],"source_ids":["AIBD-0989-source-0001"],"families":{"strategic assessments":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]},"evaluations":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]},"monetary observations":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]},"institutional decisions":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"Editorial assignment.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","record_ids":[]}},"fields":{"actors[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"developer":"Not named in the judgment","deployer":"Musst, with its then solicitors Bird & Bird"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["developer","deployer"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"actors[].ownership_control":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"ai_contribution":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"ai_relationship":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"category":"benefit created","ai_role":{"status":"unassessed","statement":"The court did not examine the review or compare it with keyword searches alone. The judgment names predictive coding and clustering analytics, but it does not describe the software or state the cost."}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ai_role","category"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].alternatives":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].assessor_date":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].depth":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"organizational","depth":1,"reason":"Musst gave disclosure from 175,723 documents with technology assisted review, and the court let it stand on an estimated cost that the judgment does not state."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].display_confidence":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"confidence":"high","evidence_word":"found","claim_status":"Found by a court","basis":"Sources: one independent court document. The cited evidence includes no independent study or report.","interpretation":"Existing display rule preserved; the richer outcome-specific confidence question still needs review."}},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].rationale":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"organizational","depth":1,"reason":"Musst gave disclosure from 175,723 documents with technology assisted review, and the court let it stand on an estimated cost that the judgment does not state."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].rubric_version":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].status_basis":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"assessments[].target":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"organizational","depth":1,"reason":"Musst gave disclosure from 175,723 documents with technology assisted review, and the court let it stand on an estimated cost that the judgment does not state."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"availability":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"brief":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"case_kind":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"case_links[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].evidence_links":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].evidence_strength":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"answer":"Found by a court. Sources: one independent court document. The cited evidence includes no independent study or report.","evidence_word":"found","claim_status":"Found by a court"}},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0989-source-0001"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"Found by a court. Sources: one independent court document. The cited evidence includes no independent study or report.","inferred":false}},"claims[].missingness":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"claims[].proposition":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"cross_border_flows[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"decisions[].action_outcome":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].grounds":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].institution_task":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"decisions[].success_criterion":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"institutional decisions"},"deployment_stage":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"structured","data":{"classification":"routine use","answer":"The system was in routine use. Musst had applied the review and given disclosure by October 2019.","scope":"The period and activity described in the case."}},"provenance":{"kind":"source_review","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","evidence"],"source_refs":["AIBD-0989-source-0001"],"reviewed_on":"2026-10-29"},"review_state":"reviewed","coverage":"complete","display":{"answer":"The system was in routine use. Musst had applied the review and given disclosure by October 2019.","inferred":false}},"economics[].amount":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].costs[]":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].counterfactual":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].currency_price_basis":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].gross_net":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].measure_type":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].period_unit":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].realization":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].recipient_payer":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].return_payback":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"economics[].valuation_method":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"monetary observations"},"evaluations[].ai_uplift":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].comparator":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].design":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].effect":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].exposure":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].id":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].measurement_method":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].metric":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].reproduction_materials":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].setting_sample":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"evaluations[].uncertainty_limitations":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"evaluations"},"external_references[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"follow_up[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"human_oversight":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"id":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"id":"AIBD-0989"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["id"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"infrastructure_dependencies[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].beneficiaries":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].beneficiary_count":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].benefit_type":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"benefit_type":"Reduced Task Cost"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["benefit_type"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].claim":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"account":"In a business dispute between Astra and Musst, Musst gave disclosure under the disclosure pilot of the Business and Property Courts. Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723. Because of that volume, its then solicitors applied two types of technology assisted review, predictive coding and clustering analytics. They explained the steps over some three pages of the disclosure statement. Astra raised the use of technology assisted review in its applications. On 22 April 2020 Chief Master Marsh held that Musst should have notified Astra, and he called the omission a failure of process. He added that, in all probability, Astra could have had no proper basis to object once the estimated cost had been provided. He declined to revisit the point. The judgment does not state the cost or describe the software, and the court did not test the review.","benefit_type":"Reduced Task Cost"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","benefit_type"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].distribution":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].duration":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].id":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].stakeholder_group":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"ratings":[{"group":"organizational","depth":1,"reason":"Musst gave disclosure from 175,723 documents with technology assisted review, and the court let it stand on an estimated cost that the judgment does not state."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["ratings"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].status":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"benefit_status":"mixed"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["benefit_status"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].tradeoffs":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"outcomes[].unexpected":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"unexpected":false,"purpose":"A vendor that the judgment does not name built the predictive coding and clustering analytics software to predict which documents are relevant and to group similar documents for review."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["unexpected","purpose"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"places[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"location":"London, United Kingdom","deployer_country":"British Virgin Islands"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["location","deployer_country"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"purpose":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"purpose":"A vendor that the judgment does not name built the predictive coding and clustering analytics software to predict which documents are relevant and to group similar documents for review."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["purpose"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"record_dates":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"date_observed":"2020-04-22","date_basis":"source publication","date_precision":"day","revisions":[{"date":"2026-11-01","change":"Added the record from the finding of the High Court of England and Wales.","source":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","editor":"AIBD"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["date_observed","date_basis","date_precision","revisions"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"replication.attempts[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"replication.conditions":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"replication":{"produced_by":["Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723.","Musst's then solicitors applied predictive coding and clustering analytics because of the volume.","The disclosure statement explains the review steps over some three pages."],"must_hold":["A party that intends to use technology assisted review tells the other party and tries to agree on the approach.","The other party receives the estimated cost of the review."],"echoes":[]}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["replication"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"revision_history[]":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"revisions":[{"date":"2026-11-01","change":"Added the record from the finding of the High Court of England and Wales.","source":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","editor":"AIBD"}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["revisions"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sector":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"domain":"Legal services / e-discovery"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["domain"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].access_version":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].citation_locator":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"evidence":[{"kind":"court document","citation":"High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Business List (ChD) (Chief Master Marsh). Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch), judgment of 22 April 2020, paras 32 to 38. Find Case Law copy.","title":"Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch)","url":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","date":"2020-04-22","written_by":"independent","quote":"In all probability, had they been so informed there could have been no proper basis for objection once the estimated cost of using technology assisted review had been provided."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].id":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["AIBD-0989-source-0001"],"role":"Existing evidence items, in their original order"},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"complete"},"sources[].language":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].relationship":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"evidence":[{"kind":"court document","citation":"High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Business List (ChD) (Chief Master Marsh). Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch), judgment of 22 April 2020, paras 32 to 38. Find Case Law copy.","title":"Astra Asset Management UK Ltd & Anor v MUSST Investments LLB & Ors [2020] EWHC 1871 (Ch)","url":"https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/ch/2020/1871","date":"2020-04-22","written_by":"independent","quote":"In all probability, had they been so informed there could have been no proper basis for objection once the estimated cost of using technology assisted review had been provided."}]}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["evidence"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"sources[].upstream_sources":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"strategic_assessments[]":{"state":"unresolved","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial","family":"strategic assessments"},"summary":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"summary":"In April 2020 the High Court in London faulted Musst for not announcing its technology assisted review of 175,723 documents but found no likely basis to object to its cost.","account":"In a business dispute between Astra and Musst, Musst gave disclosure under the disclosure pilot of the Business and Property Courts. Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723. Because of that volume, its then solicitors applied two types of technology assisted review, predictive coding and clustering analytics. They explained the steps over some three pages of the disclosure statement. Astra raised the use of technology assisted review in its applications. On 22 April 2020 Chief Master Marsh held that Musst should have notified Astra, and he called the omission a failure of process. He added that, in all probability, Astra could have had no proper basis to object once the estimated cost had been provided. He declined to revisit the point. The judgment does not state the cost or describe the software, and the court did not test the review."}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["summary","account"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].autonomy_permissions":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].component_role":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].deployment_configuration":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].inputs_outputs":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].model_name":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].model_version":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].product_name":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"system":"Technology assisted review by predictive coding and clustering analytics"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["system"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"systems[].provider":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"taxonomy_crosswalks[]":{"state":"unresolved","provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"reason":"This is an explicit unresolved assignment: the sources on record do not settle this question.","review_state":"not_assessed","coverage":"partial"},"title":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"title":"The High Court in London declined to revisit Musst's technology assisted review of 175,723 documents, seeing no likely basis to object to its cost","headline":"London court declines to revisit Musst's *TAR* of 175,723 documents"}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["title","headline"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"},"version":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"identifiers","identifiers":["ae90e38237e3dfc2c66010d8c822ce68262ea59e85ab819fa844d2f473c3bd4b"],"role":"SHA-256 of the complete public record and its assessments"},"provenance":{"kind":"curatorial","basis":"SHA-256 of the public record, its assessments, and its displayed answers and notes, excluding its own identifier and the derived coverage summary.","record_fields":[],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"complete"},"workflow":{"state":"value_present","value":{"kind":"record_fields","fields":{"account":"In a business dispute between Astra and Musst, Musst gave disclosure under the disclosure pilot of the Business and Property Courts. Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723. Because of that volume, its then solicitors applied two types of technology assisted review, predictive coding and clustering analytics. They explained the steps over some three pages of the disclosure statement. Astra raised the use of technology assisted review in its applications. On 22 April 2020 Chief Master Marsh held that Musst should have notified Astra, and he called the omission a failure of process. He added that, in all probability, Astra could have had no proper basis to object once the estimated cost had been provided. He declined to revisit the point. The judgment does not state the cost or describe the software, and the court did not test the review.","replication":{"produced_by":["Keyword searches cut 198,735 unique documents only to 175,723.","Musst's then solicitors applied predictive coding and clustering analytics because of the volume.","The disclosure statement explains the review steps over some three pages."],"must_hold":["A party that intends to use technology assisted review tells the other party and tries to agree on the approach.","The other party receives the estimated cost of the review."],"echoes":[]}}},"provenance":{"kind":"legacy_record","basis":"Editorial assignment.","record_fields":["account","replication"],"source_refs":[]},"review_state":"record_mapped","coverage":"partial"}},"summary":{"total":91,"addressed":91,"known":28,"reviewed":2,"reviewed_complete":2,"reviewed_partial":0,"record_mapped":26,"review_not_assessed":63,"not_assessed":0,"complete":false,"by_state":{"value_present":28,"not_reported":0,"unresolved":63,"not_assessed":0,"not_applicable":0,"withheld":0,"source_unavailable":0}}},"presentation_version":"29ff242dc2664169b874f4cbc9415a494b92c8f27af6af6c36ea08ea3dd68df0"}