Glivent FAQs
Can a law firm use Private AI with confidential or privileged material?
Direct Answer
Yes. Glivent Private AI can process an approved legal document task on the onsite Glive Pod instead of sending that model task to a public AI provider. Access can be limited by matter and staff role, while the responsible solicitor reviews the source and result before it is used.
Keep access within the matter
Confidential and privileged material should stay within the matter and purpose for which it was provided. Glivent can limit the workflow to approved documents, authorised staff and the specific action it needs to perform.
What the NSW courts require of the tool itself
For NSW litigation, this is not only a professional-duties question. It is a condition on the technology. Supreme Court Practice Note SC Gen 23, issued 28 January 2025 and commencing 3 February 2025, applies to all proceedings from that date. Its paragraph 9A provides that information subject to non-publication or suppression orders, the implied (Harman) undertaking, material produced on subpoena, or material subject to a statutory publication prohibition "must not be entered into any Gen AI program unless" the practitioner is satisfied the information will remain within the controlled environment of the platform, that the platform carries confidentiality restrictions on the supplier so the data "is not made publicly available and is not used to train any large language models", that it is used only in connection with that proceeding, and that it is not used to train the program or any large language model. Transcription, translation, spell-checking and formatting sit outside the practice note. The District Court, Local Court, Land and Environment Court and NCAT have adopted materially the same position.
A Private AI task on the onsite Pod is one way to meet those conditions, because the material is processed on the firm's own hardware and is not sent to a provider that could retain or train on it. It is not the only way, and the practice note puts the judgement on the practitioner, not the vendor. The firm still has to satisfy itself about the platform it uses and keep the material within the matter.
What Glivent can do
Glivent chooses a defined task and tests it without opening access across unrelated matters. The responsible solicitor sees the source material beside the output and can correct or reject it. If a cloud model is needed for part of the work, a Hybrid design can redact identifying details before the approved step.
What stays with your team
The firm remains responsible for confidentiality, professional duties, accuracy and the decision to use any AI-assisted work. Private AI gives the firm a controlled processing option; it does not turn generated text into legal judgement.