AI governance
Bounded adviceAI Regulatory Applicability Opinion: a position you can rely on
At some point a board, an investor, an insurer or a customer stops accepting a confident summary and asks for a position someone will put their name to. Two to three weeks for a reasoned opinion on one defined system in defined markets: what role you hold, what applies, and what follows from it.
- Published range
- $2,500–6,000 / opinion
- Timing after intake
- 2–3 weeks
- Quoted in India
- ₹1,25,000–3,00,000 / opinion
Fixed scope, not hourly. Quoted before we start, with the exclusions written down. The India figure is a separate price for a separate market, not a conversion.
How this is actually run
One defined question answered properly - a system, a vendor, a transfer route, a questionnaire - with the reasoning written out and the documents to act on it.
The scope is fixed before the work starts, which is why the price is a published range rather than an hourly estimate. Anything outside it is quoted separately rather than absorbed quietly or billed by surprise.
- Why clients instruct us
- At some point a board, an investor, an insurer or a customer stops accepting a confident summary and asks for a position someone is prepared to put their name to. That is a different document from a consultant's risk matrix, and it is the thing a consultancy cannot give you.
- What we actually do
- We define the system and the markets precisely, because an opinion on 'our AI' is worth nothing. Then: intended purpose, the role you hold, territorial scope, the exceptions that may apply, and the obligations that follow if the classification holds. The reasoning is written out, each proposition is tied to a dated source, and the points genuinely open are identified as open rather than smoothed over.
- What sits outside this
- An opinion covers the system and the markets it names and no others. Advice on the law of a particular country is given by lawyers qualified in that country. Technical verification that the system behaves as described is a specialist matter, and the opinion states that it proceeds on the facts you have given us.
- What you can show afterwards
- A reasoned written opinion you can put in front of a board, an investor or a counterparty, with its assumptions, its limits and its date on the face of it - and, depending on the rules of the jurisdiction concerned, the privilege that attaches to legal advice.
What you receive
A reasoned written opinion on which obligations apply to a defined system in defined markets, what role you hold, and what follows from that.
One system, named markets. The opinion covers what it names and no others; extending it to another system or another market is a further instruction. Advice on the law of a particular country is given by lawyers qualified in that country. Technical verification that the system behaves as described is a specialist matter, and the opinion proceeds on the facts given to us.
- A precise definition of the system and the markets the opinion covers
- Your role under each regime considered, with the reasoning written out
- The obligations that follow if the classification holds, and when they bite
- The exceptions and carve-outs considered, including those we concluded do not apply
- Open questions identified as open, rather than resolved by assertion
- Every proposition tied to a dated source
- Assumptions, limits and date stated on the face of the opinion
What it costs, and what it replaces
Both figures are published ranges for the same unit of work. Ours is fixed before we start; if our process gets faster, that is our gain and your price does not move.
How engagements are structured →Published range for this engagement, against the span of the whole card. In India the same scope is quoted at ₹1,25,000–3,00,000 — a separate price for a separate market, not a conversion. Where in the range a quote lands is set by scope, entities and how much usable evidence already exists.
Midpoint $4,250 per opinion
How the work runs
01
Define the question
An opinion on 'our AI' is worth nothing. We agree exactly which system, which markets and which regimes are in scope, and write that definition into the opinion itself.
02
Establish the facts
The opinion proceeds on facts, so the facts get tested. Intended purpose, users affected, autonomy, data, geography and deployment route are confirmed with the people who built the thing, not inferred from a product page.
03
Analyse
Role, territorial scope, applicable obligations and relevant exceptions, each reasoned from a dated source. We do not assume every AI system is high risk, or that every company is a provider; where the answer turns on a genuinely open point, the opinion says so.
04
Second review
A second qualified reviewer tests the reasoning before it issues. An opinion nobody argued with internally is not an opinion worth relying on.
05
Issue
The opinion issues with its assumptions, its limits and its date on the face of it, so a reader two years from now knows exactly what it did and did not cover.
What we need from you
- A precise description of the system: what it does, for whom, with what autonomy
- The markets it is offered in, and how it reaches users in each
- Model and vendor details, including versions and configuration
- Any existing classification work, however informal
- Someone technical who can confirm how the system actually behaves
What we check before delivery
- Every legal proposition links to a dated primary source, not to a secondary summary
- Facts about your system are confirmed by the person responsible for it before they are relied on
- A second qualified reviewer tests the reasoning before issue
- Open points are identified as open, with what would resolve them
When firms send us this
- A board, investor or insurer has asked for a position on your regulatory exposure
- A customer's contract requires a statement about your classification
- A product decision depends on whether a use is high risk
- You have had two confident but contradictory answers and need one you can rely on
Questions about ai regulatory applicability opinion
How is this different from the diagnostic?
The diagnostic establishes the position quickly across your whole estate, so you know where you stand and what to fix. An opinion goes deep on one system, with reasoning you can rely on and put in front of someone else. Most clients want the diagnostic first and an opinion only where there is a reason to need one.
Is it privileged?
Legal advice from a law firm may attract legal professional privilege in a way that a consultant's report generally does not, but privilege is a question of the rules of the jurisdiction concerned and of how the advice is handled afterwards. We will tell you how the engagement is structured and advise on keeping advice and operational records appropriately separated; we will not promise privilege as though it were automatic.
What if the answer is one we do not like?
Then it is the answer, and you have it before a regulator or a counterparty finds it. We will set out the options honestly, including changing the system so a different classification applies, which is often the cheaper route.
Firms who send us this usually also send
This engagement
Scope it in fifteen minutes.
AI Regulatory Applicability Opinion at $2,500–6,000 per opinion, delivered in 2–3 weeks after a complete intake. Scoping costs nothing, and we will say if a smaller engagement would serve you better.