AI and Editorial Ethics Policy

AI drafts; people decide. No AI-assisted summary or article is published without review by a person, and responsibility for what we publish rests with a person, never with a model. Content produced with the help of AI is labelled as such, and the assistant inside Marklet identifies itself as AI.

We cite primary sources. A quotation in a summary is checked mechanically against the source document before publication, and a quotation we cannot find there is dropped. Articles are checked against primary sources before they are published.

We publish legal information, never legal advice. A summary describes what a court or tribunal decided, what legislation does, or what the government has published. It does not tell anyone what to do in their own situation, predict the outcome of proceedings, or advise on whether to bring or defend a claim. Summaries describe decisions neutrally, and we do not comment on live proceedings or on judges.

We monitor these sources, and only these:

• legislation.gov.uk: UK and Welsh statutory instruments and Acts of Senedd Cymru.
• GOV.UK: First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) residential property decisions for England, and publications on freehold and leasehold property.
• Find Case Law, from The National Archives: judgments of the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber), the Court of Appeal (Civil Division) and the Supreme Court, used under licence. Wherever Marklet shows this material to its customers, it carries these two statements:Crown copyright material reproduced by permission of The National Archives. The contents of the judgment can be used under the Open Justice – Licence.Judgments and decisions on Marklet are sourced from The National Archives' Find Case Law service. Not every decision is published there, so this material is only part of the work of the courts and tribunals and not a complete record. Always check the original at caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk.

Each day we read what these sources have newly published. Fixed rules set aside items plainly outside residential leasehold and block management, and keep some plainly inside it; an AI model sorts the rest by topic and, when unsure, keeps an item rather than discarding it. A person reviews every item kept. Where a summary is written, an AI model drafts it from the document itself, its quotations are checked as section 2 describes, and a person approves it before anyone else can see it. We use Anthropic's Claude models, run on Google Cloud in the European Union.

Legislation and GOV.UK material: contains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Summaries are shown only to signed-in users of accounts whose plan includes Legal Updates. Each carries the title, topics, any verified quotations and a link to the original record. We do not republish full judgments or decisions, we do not let search engines index them, and there is no bulk export.

We organise this work by legal topic, never by person. We do not profile judges, parties or witnesses, and we do not combine information from court records with other information about the same people. A Find Case Law judgment whose heading or opening carries a reporting restriction or anonymity notice we detect is never summarised or published.

No source is a complete record of the law. Records are revised and withdrawn after publication: we re-check what we hold against its source, and when a source withdraws or removes a record we hold, we remove our summary of it.

If you think something we have published is wrong or unfair, tell us at hello@marklet.io. If the concern is credible we take the item down while we look into it, and if it is upheld we correct or withdraw it with a visible note. This policy is owned by the founder of LEVERED AI LTD and reviewed whenever our sources, process or AI models change.