header-logo header-logo

01 September 2018 / Kelly Atherton
Categories: Features , Profession , Technology
printer mail-detail

Power tool

828267118-1024x1024

Kelly Atherton discusses how TAR works & why it matters for legal professionals

  • Technology-assisted review tools can support legal professionals in achieving significant time and cost savings.

Technology-assisted review (TAR), an algorithm-based method of classifying documents based on coding input from case subject matter experts (SME), is a powerful tool that can save time and significantly cut costs by reducing the amount of human review needed to locate relevant documents in a data set.  

The adoption of TAR is no longer the exclusive domain of large law firms and Fortune 500 companies. The technology is accessible to mid-size and independent legal practices. However, fear surrounding how this technology works and a lack of understanding of how such technologies can be integrated within existing review workflows is still creating a barrier to adoption for some legal professionals.

How TAR works

TAR, also known as predictive coding, computer-assisted review, or supervised machine learning, is an iterative and interactive process between the SME(s) and the TAR software. The SME reviews and codes electronically stored documents as

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

NLJ Career Profile: Daniel Burbeary, Michelman Robinson

Daniel Burbeary, office managing partner of Michelman Robinson, discusses launching in London, the power of the law, and what the kitchen can teach us about litigating

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

Joelson—Jennifer Mansoor

West End firm strengthens employment and immigration team with partner hire

JMW—Belinda Brooke

JMW—Belinda Brooke

Employment and people solutions offering boosted by partner hire

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll