Every New Zealand firm has now had the AI conversation; Harvey and Legora made sure of that. Airclerk helps NZ firms put Claude to work on real matters, governed and evidenced, on the systems the firm already runs. We reviewed all 151 skills in Anthropic's open-source Claude for Legal suite and built an NZ Law Pack for the gaps that matter most.
Use Copilot? We can implement on your preferred platform.
New Zealand law firms use Anthropic's Claude models across document-heavy legal work such as matter chronologies, discovery review and privilege sorting, contract review against the firm's playbook, due diligence, briefs of evidence support, Privacy Act access requests and permission-aware precedent search. In legal practice Claude needs to be connected to the document management system, matter files, permissions and lawyer approval steps before it can be used safely on client work, with matter isolation so one client's material is walled off from another's.
The lawyer-referral lists name Australia, Canada, Scotland and Northern Ireland; the New Zealand Law Society is absent. Every output header asserts US "attorney work product"; NZ privilege runs through the Evidence Act 2006, and the label carries no weight here.
The termination review assumes at-will employment; NZ dismissals need justification and fair process. The patent intake treats the US one-year grace period as a green light; NZ's grace period is newer and narrower, and relying on one can still sink the overseas filings. Contract deadlines roll against US federal holidays, so Matariki and anniversary days silently don't exist. Demand-letter drafting is tuned to US litigation risk, not the Fair Trading Act exposure an NZ letter actually carries.
Deposition prep, in a jurisdiction with no US-style depositions; briefs of evidence are the NZ artefact. Subpoena triage, where NZ uses witness summonses and statutory notices. A DMCA takedown workflow and an EU AI Act register, neither of which is NZ law.
The Airclerk NZ Law Pack: New Zealand skills for employment, privacy, companies, litigation and regulatory work, written to the suite's own anatomy and QA rubric. Employment Relations Act dismissal reviews, IPP 6 access requests on the 20-working-day clock, Companies Act resolutions, briefs of evidence, without-prejudice demand letters. Ask us about it.
The patterns that produce the cleanest path from pilot to production. Each is a candidate first workflow for a Readiness Sprint.
De-duplicated, significance-tagged chronologies from the matter file, every entry cited to source.
First-pass sorting for lists of documents, privilege claims flagged for a lawyer, never silently stripped.
Term-by-term deviation analysis against the firm's own positions, with surgical redlines and NZ-law deltas.
One row per document, every cell cited, straight from the data room to a review-ready grid.
Source-checked drafts in the witness's own words, hearsay and opinion issues flagged for counsel.
IPP 6 access requests on the 20-working-day clock, withholding grounds analysed per document.
Permission-aware search across the firm's precedent bank, styles and internal knowledge.
Select-committee calls for submissions, regulator consultations and commencement dates, tracked with owners and deadlines.
Matter status summaries by audience: the client letter, the partner brief, the file note.
Behind every workflow sits AI Process Assurance: the reasoning, sources and sign-off retained as an AI Workpaper, so the firm can show what the AI did, how it was checked and who signed off.
Two-week, fixed-price plan.
First governed workflow into production.
Controls, approvals, audit trails.
Monitor, improve, expand.
Hosted by Airclerk, or deployed single-tenant into your own Azure tenant on request - so the controls, evidence and audit trail sit where your risk partners need them.
A board-ready Claude implementation plan for your firm in two weeks.
New Zealand law firms use Claude across document-heavy legal work: matter chronologies, discovery review and privilege sorting, contract review against the firm's playbook, due diligence, briefs of evidence support, Privacy Act access requests and permission-aware precedent search. Airclerk designs and implements these as governed workflows, connected to the firm's document management system, matter files, permissions and approval steps, so a lawyer reviews and signs off everything that matters. We are Claude-preferred but platform-aware, and can implement on Copilot where that is your standard.
Claude for Legal is Anthropic's open-source suite of legal plugins for Claude: 12 practice-area plugins, 151 skills, scheduled agents and legal-system connectors, released under an Apache 2.0 licence in May 2026. It is well engineered, and almost all of its hardcoded law is American. Airclerk reviewed every skill in the suite and found New Zealand appears nowhere in it; several defaults would actively mislead an NZ firm. We built an NZ Law Pack to the suite's own anatomy: New Zealand skills for employment, privacy, companies, litigation and regulatory work, which we implement and adapt for individual firms.
No. Every output is a draft for a lawyer's review, with sources cited and uncertainty flagged. The reviewing lawyer takes professional responsibility for anything that leaves the building, exactly as with work produced by a junior. Airclerk is an AI implementation consultancy, not a law firm, and the workflows we build are designed around that boundary: consequential actions stop for human sign-off, and supervision stays with the firm.
Workflows are built with matter isolation, so one client's material is walled off from another's work, and permission-aware access to the firm's existing document stores. Vendor terms are checked for training-on-data and offshore hosting before anything connects. Deployment can be hosted by Airclerk or single-tenant in the firm's own Azure tenant, so the controls and evidence sit where your risk partners need them.
Harvey and Legora are strong products, sold as platform subscriptions. Airclerk's approach is different: we implement Claude on the systems the firm already runs, starting from Anthropic's open-source Claude for Legal suite localised for New Zealand, so the firm owns the workflows and the prompts, and keeps the record of what the AI did. For many NZ firms the honest comparison is a platform subscription against a build the firm keeps. We think the record of AI-assisted work on client matters is worth owning.