Legislation and case-law research engine
Every answer carries its source.
U2 AI Legal does not give legal opinions and does not tell you where you stand. It brings the relevant statutory provision and the published decisions back with their citations, so you open the official source and check it yourself. Everything the system produces is working material prepared for review by a qualified lawyer.
In development. A product of U2 AI Studio Teknoloji A.S. Interface visuals on this page are illustrative, not screenshots of a released product.
The problem we are building against
The costly mistake is rarely the search. It is the citation nobody opened.
Courts in several jurisdictions have had to deal with filings that rested on decisions which did not exist, and lawyers have faced professional consequences for them. The pattern in those files is always the same: the reasoning reads convincingly while the docket and decision numbers do not hold. No assurance that a system never invents anything can be taken on trust, because the reader cannot test the assurance, only the citation.
So the design goal is deliberately narrow: show no citation that has no record behind it, say plainly when nothing is found, and keep the source one click from the sentence that relies on it.
Modules
Six modules, one rule: nothing without a source.
U2 AI Legal is under development. What follows is the design target for each module: what it looks up, what it puts on the screen, and where it stops. None of it is a measured performance figure, and no module gives a legal opinion.
Legislation Engine
Ask in plain language, get the provision itself, with the Official Gazette date and number attached to it.
- Designed to work over the consolidated texts published in the Presidency's Legislation Information System (mevzuat.gov.tr), a source open to the public free of charge and without any subscription requirement. We have no agreement, API access or integration with that system, and any access will remain subject to that portal's own terms of use.
- Every provision comes back with its identity card: law number, article, and the Official Gazette date and issue behind the current wording.
- Coverage limits are marked inside the product rather than hidden. Where a text is not published in the official system, the answer says so instead of filling the gap.
Case Law Search
Precedent search that puts the ruling and the ruling against it on the same screen, never one without the other.
- Designed to run over judgments published on the public official portals (Court of Cassation, Council of State and the UYAP precedent search). These portals publish a selection of decisions rather than the whole body of case law, and Turkish law is not a system of binding precedent: apart from decisions on the unification of conflicting judgments, a published judgment is persuasive, not binding.
- Source scope is to be defined per project. Where an institution holds its own licence to a commercial database, scope would be agreed in writing with that provider first; no third party content is ingested without permission.
- Decisions pointing the other way are placed next to the supporting ones. Finding no precedent is reported as a finding, because absence of a published judgment is not absence of law.
Validity and Force Check
The most expensive mistake in legal research is relying on a repealed article, so this check runs first, not last.
- Each provision is shown with its status at the date of the query: in force, amended, or repealed, together with the instrument that changed it.
- Where the consolidated text and the text published in the Official Gazette differ, both are shown with their dates so the reader can decide which one governs.
- Amendment history is presented as an old text and new text comparison, so a changed sentence is visible on the page rather than assumed.
Contract and Document Review
A first pass over your documents that flags what needs attention and links every flag to the provision behind it.
- Reads uploaded contracts and files, marks the clauses that call for attention, and attaches the statutory article or the judgment each mark rests on.
- It does not determine that a clause is unlawful and does not assess the merits of a matter. It brings you the source and leaves the judgement where it belongs.
- Every text the module produces is a working draft prepared for review by a qualified lawyer, and that statement is printed on the output itself.
ESD AI: Articles of Association
Your articles of association read line by line against the Turkish Commercial Code, prepared for your legal team to act on.
- Compares the articles clause by clause with the Turkish Commercial Code and flags provisions needing attention, each one linked to the article it came from.
- Produces an old text and new text comparison table plus a draft amendment as working material for review. It is not a text ready for registration and carries no compliance confirmation.
- General assembly and registry steps are laid out as a preparation checklist, so the meeting with your lawyer starts from a prepared file rather than a blank page.
Confidentiality and Data
Your files stay yours: no cross-client training, no borrowed answers, and the controller role stays with you.
- Design commitment: your inputs, outputs and uploaded files will not be used to train models, and one organisation's material will never be used to answer another organisation's question.
- Processing roles to be fixed in writing before any file is handled: the customer as data controller, U2 AI Studio as processor under Law No. 6698, with a data processing agreement in place first.
- For lawyers, professional secrecy under Article 36 of the Attorneys' Act is the binding constraint; any deployment will be arranged with your bar obligations in view. We hold no security certification and claim none.
How it works
From a question to a citation you can open and check yourself.
You ask the question
Write the matter in plain language, in Turkish or English, and attach the file, the clause or the fact pattern if you have one. No special query syntax, no prompt craft.
The search runs on a closed source set
The question is answered against a defined set of legislation and published judgments rather than the model's memory. Where nothing is found, the answer says nothing was found. An empty result is better than an invented one.
Every statement comes back with its citation
Each claim carries what it rests on: law number and article, or chamber, docket number, decision number and date, together with the Official Gazette reference and the in force status. The citation is a record identifier, not a piece of text the model composed.
The lawyer opens the source and decides
You open the citation, read it at the source, and make the call. The product does not remove that step and does not stand in for it. Under Article 35 of the Attorneys' Act No. 1136, giving opinions on legal questions is reserved to attorneys registered with a bar association.
Who it is for
Four kinds of user, and two things they keep coming back for
The same engine, framed differently depending on who is asking. In every case the boundary is identical: the system carries you to the source, and the legal judgment stays with a qualified lawyer.
Law firms and attorneys
Start from a question and end at the provision and the judgment it rests on, each with its full citation, court, chamber, case and decision number and date. Contrary authority is shown next to supporting authority rather than filtered out, so the weak point in an argument surfaces while there is still time to deal with it. Nothing the system produces is an opinion. The reading, the judgment and the signature stay with the attorney.
In-house legal departments
For a legal counsel handling a wide subject range with a small team, the first pass is the expensive part. The platform is designed to gather the relevant provisions and published decisions on a question, marks which texts are current and which have been amended or repealed, and hands over a referenced working file. What that file means for the company is decided by the legal department, not by the software.
Public institutions and regulatory authorities
Designed for legislative preparation and review work: locating provisions across related instruments, following amendments through their Official Gazette record, and assembling referenced background files for a drafting or review process. It is not built to assist a judicial body in producing a decision, and it is not offered for that purpose. We have no official cooperation, integration or approval relationship with any institution.
Companies without a legal team
This is a preparation tool that makes working with a lawyer easier, not a substitute for one. A company can research its own matter, see the relevant provision with its citation, understand which questions actually matter, and arrive at the meeting prepared instead of starting from zero. Under Turkish law, companies of certain sizes are required to retain contracted counsel, and nothing here changes that.
Articles of association review (ESD AI module)
Compares articles of association line by line against the Turkish Commercial Code, flags provisions that need attention and links each flag to the statutory article behind it. It produces an old-versus-new comparison table and a working draft. It does not certify compliance, does not issue a determination of violation, and does not produce a text ready for registry filing. Those are decisions for a qualified lawyer.
Following a change through an existing document set
When a provision changes, the question is which of your existing contracts, internal regulations or standard texts touch it. The platform locates the affected passages, shows the previous and current wording of the provision with its Official Gazette record, and produces a referenced list for review. The list is a starting point for a lawyer, not a compliance verdict.
Why this way
Four decisions that shape everything else
It does not give an opinion. It takes you to the source.
This is a deliberate design choice, not a limitation we are apologising for. Under Article 35 of the Attorneys' Act No. 1136, giving opinions on legal questions, and preparing the documents belonging to such work, are reserved to attorneys registered with a bar association. U2 AI Legal does not give opinions and does not advise on the merits of a matter. It puts the relevant provision and the relevant judgment in front of you with their citations. Every text it produces carries a line on its face saying it is working material prepared for review by a qualified lawyer.
A citation you cannot open is worse than no answer
Courts in several countries have sanctioned lawyers who filed submissions containing case references that turned out not to exist. In the reported incidents the failure was rarely the reasoning. It was a citation nobody opened. The most dangerous version is the one where the substance reads correctly and only the case and decision number is wrong, because it survives a quick skim. Our design target is that a record with no source is never displayed at all, and that where nothing is found the system says nothing was found. An empty answer is better than an invented one. We make no claim of being free of error, and independent academic work has already shown such claims do not hold.
In-force checking, because relying on a repealed article is the expensive mistake
A provision can be amended, its wording replaced, or the whole article repealed, and a consolidated text will still read perfectly well. The design target is that every provision returned carries its status and its Official Gazette record for date and issue number, so an amended or repealed article is visible as such before anyone builds an argument on it. Where the consolidated text and the published amendment differ, the product shows both rather than choosing for you.
A U2 AI Studio venture, built in the open about what it is
U2 AI Legal is a software product developed within U2 AI Studio Teknoloji A.S., alongside sister products in finance, audit and agriculture. It is not a law firm and not a consultancy. It represents no party in any dispute, follows no proceeding before any authority, and forms no attorney-client relationship with anyone. The product is in development. What you see on this page is the design intent, described as such, with no measured performance figures attached to it.
Get in touch
Tell us what you would look up first
The product is in development, and the useful conversation right now is about scope: which body of legislation, which courts, which period, and what a first pass would have to get right to be worth anything to you. Write to us and we will come back with what is realistic and what is not.
Thanks. We'll get back to you within one business day.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Does this product give legal advice?
No. Under Article 35 of the Attorneys' Act No. 1136, giving opinions on legal questions and preparing the documents belonging to such work are reserved to attorneys registered with a bar association. U2 AI Legal does not give legal opinions, does not assess the merits of your matter, and does not tell you what to do. It brings you the relevant statutory provision and the relevant judgment, each with its citation, its source and its date, so that you can open the source and decide for yourself. Every text the system produces is working material prepared for review and approval by a qualified lawyer; nothing it produces is final without that review.
Does it replace a lawyer?
No, and it is not designed to. For law firms and in-house legal teams, U2 AI Legal is a research and first-pass tool that shortens the search, not the judgment: the reading, the assessment and the signature stay with the lawyer. For companies without a legal team, it is a preparation tool used within the scope of their own legal affairs, in the sense of Article 35/3 of the Attorneys' Act. You research the subject, you see the relevant provision with its citation, and you go into the meeting with your lawyer prepared. Note that Turkish law requires companies above certain thresholds, and building cooperatives with one hundred or more members, to retain contracted counsel; this product does not stand in for that obligation.
Where does the case-law data come from?
From publicly accessible official sources: the Legislation Information System for consolidated statute text, the Official Gazette for publication and amendment dates, and the Court of Cassation, Council of State and UYAP precedent portals for published judgments. Under Article 31 of Law No. 5846, the texts of legislation and judicial decisions are free to reproduce and process as a matter of copyright. That is a separate question from access: we observe each portal's own terms of use, we use no bulk or automated collection method those terms prohibit, and we have no API agreement, data partnership or integration with any of them. Content from commercial legal databases is used only where the customer holds its own licence and that provider agrees in writing.
Are my files confidential?
Confidentiality is a design requirement, not a slogan, and because the product is still in development what follows is a commitment about how it is being built rather than a description of a running system. The commitment is this: your inputs, outputs and uploaded documents will not be used to train models; one organisation's material will never be used to answer another organisation's question; and processing roles will be fixed in writing before any file is handled, with the customer as data controller and U2 AI Studio as processor under Law No. 6698. For lawyers, professional secrecy under Article 36 of the Attorneys' Act is the binding constraint on any deployment, and any arrangement will be agreed with your bar obligations in view. We hold no security certification and claim none.
How is the risk of fabricated citations handled?
By architecture, not by promise. The claim that retrieval-grounded systems eliminate hallucination has been tested and rejected in independent academic measurement, so we do not make it. What we do instead: the system is built to work over a closed set of legislation and published decisions rather than the model's memory, and a citation in the output is a record identifier rather than a string the model composed. The design goal is that a citation with no underlying record is never shown at all, and that where nothing can be retrieved the answer is "no source found". An empty answer is better than an invented one. Verification remains yours, and courts in several jurisdictions have made clear that this duty cannot be delegated; our aim is to make that verification take seconds rather than minutes, not to remove it.
How current is the legislation, and does it check whether a provision is still in force?
In-force status is the point where the most expensive mistakes are made, so it is treated as a first-class feature rather than a footnote. The design goal is that every provision returned carries its status, the amending instrument and the Official Gazette date and issue number, so that reliance on a repealed or amended article is visible immediately rather than discovered later. In-force and amendment tracking is based on texts published in the Official Gazette; where a consolidated text and the text as published in the Official Gazette diverge, the product is designed to show both references. Known coverage gaps in the source systems, such as communiqués predating 2004, are marked openly inside the product rather than silently omitted.
What is the ESD AI module?
ESD AI is the articles-of-association module. It compares your articles line by line against the Turkish Commercial Code, flags provisions that need attention, and links each flag to the underlying statutory article so a lawyer can go straight to the source. It produces an old-versus-new comparison table and a draft revision text. What it deliberately does not do: it does not determine that your articles violate the Commercial Code, it does not certify compliance, and it does not produce a text ready for registration. Those are legal characterisations and document work reserved to attorneys. The output is a first pass and a working document prepared for your legal team's review; the decision, the wording and the filing remain theirs.
What stage is the product at?
U2 AI Legal is under development. Everything described on this site is a design target, not a measured result. We publish no performance percentages, no time-saving figures, no accuracy rates, no user counts and no customer references, because we have no verified measurement to support them and an unverifiable claim in advertising is itself a legal problem. The interface images on this site are illustrative and are not screenshots of a shipped product; the data shown in them is sample data. If you want to see where the work actually stands, request a demo and we will show you the current state rather than a rendering of it.