Practised in
South African law.
SenseFrame is jurisdictional AI. Built entirely on our law, for the attorneys and advocates who practise it.
One matter.
In full.
Artefacts, authorities, queries and drafts remain together in the context of the matter.
The world's best legal AI was never built for South African law.
SenseFrame was.
South African law is not a market segment. It is a legal system.
Roman-Dutch common law shaped by English procedure, governed by constitutional supremacy, interpreted through its own courts, its own precedent and its own legal tradition.
Global legal AI is built broadly and localised afterwards. SenseFrame took the opposite path.
One jurisdiction, taken seriously in full. From the Constitution down.
Jurisdictional AI
A system built from one legal system, for the practitioners who practise within it. It begins with the jurisdiction rather than localising to it afterwards.
South African law is our first language.
Every matter, mastered.
The complete matter, from first document to final draft.
Your first draft is ready for review. Should I add a tailored prayer defining "competing services" from A01 clause 5?
The matter is shared.
The context stays intact.
Bring colleagues into the same matter with deliberate access to the same artefacts, authorities, queries and drafts. Everyone works from the same context.
Control who can enter and work within a matter.
Colleagues work from the same record, authorities and queries.
Approved templates, precedents and firm knowledge remain available across matters.
What the firm builds, the firm keeps.
Approved templates, precedents and firm knowledge remain available across matters inside the firm's workspace.
Every answer, grounded in authority.
See the authority behind the proposition. The source stays visible so you can verify before you rely.
On the papers, the restraint is presumptively enforceable. The party resisting it bears the onus of showing that enforcement would be unreasonable . Cedar & Coast holds protectable interests in its trade secrets and customer connections, and the clause is directed at those interests .
The vulnerable element is territorial scope. A court weighing the employee's freedom to trade may find a nationwide restraint wider than reasonably necessary . Relief confined to the defined competing services is materially more likely to be enforced.
Employment Agreement, Naledi Mokoena
4. Confidentiality. The Employee acknowledges that in the course of employment she will have access to Confidential Information as defined in clause 3 and undertakes not to use or disclose it other than in the proper performance of her duties.
Clause 55. Restraint of trade. For a period of twelve months following termination of employment, howsoever arising, the Employee shall not, anywhere in the Republic of South Africa, be employed by or render services to any competitor of the Company in renewable-energy project advisory, commercial bid advisory or transaction-support services.
6. Non-solicitation. For a period of twelve months following termination, the Employee shall not solicit or deal with any client or active prospect of the Company with whom she had material dealings during the twelve months preceding termination.
Magna Alloys & Research (SA) (Pty) Ltd v Ellis
The Court considered whether covenants in restraint of trade should be regarded as prima facie unenforceable, as in English law, or as prima facie valid in accordance with the principle of sanctity of contract.
HoldingAgreements in restraint of trade are, in principle, valid and enforceable. A party who seeks to avoid such an agreement bears the onus of proving that its enforcement would be contrary to public policy, having regard to the circumstances at the time enforcement is sought.
The Court accordingly departed from the earlier approach and placed the burden of establishing unreasonableness on the party resisting the restraint.
Reddy v Siemens Telecommunications (Pty) Ltd
[15] The enquiry is whether the restraint is reasonable as between the parties and in the public interest, weighing the interest of the party seeking enforcement in protecting its trade secrets or customer connections against the interest of the restrained party in being economically active.
Paragraph 16[16] Section 22 of the Constitution guarantees the right to choose a trade, occupation or profession freely. That right must be weighed against the principle that agreements freely entered into should be honoured. A restraint that goes further than is reasonably necessary to protect the legitimate interest will, to that extent, be unenforceable.
[17] The Court confirmed the enquiry in Basson v Chilwan and applied it to the facts, enforcing the restraint to the extent necessary to protect the employer's confidential information.
Trace the proposition. Read the source. Apply your judgment.
The machine prepares.
The practitioner decides.
SenseFrame prepares the record, research and first draft. Judgment, strategy and responsibility remain with the practitioner.
The work still carries your name. It should.
Built from inside legal practice.
SenseFrame was shaped alongside practising South African attorneys, informed by more than 25 years of legal practice. Legal experience defines the professional context. Engineering builds to it.
Catherine Coetzee
Practising attorney. More than 25 years of legal practice and her own firm. Her work informs how SenseFrame handles matters, records and drafting.
Confidential work demands deliberate controls.
SenseFrame is built to keep firm and matter information private, separated and accessible only to those authorised to work with it.
Each firm's environment and matter data are kept separate from other firms on the platform.
Access to matters is deliberately granted and controlled within the firm's workspace.
Your documents and matter data are not used to train public AI models.
SenseFrame is built on Microsoft Azure infrastructure.
Security is an ongoing discipline.
Explore our security approachOne platform. Priced by seat.
Every plan includes the complete SenseFrame platform. Pricing adjusts with practice size. Start with a 14-day free trial.
Matters·Artefacts·Authorities·Queries·Drafting·Templates·Collaboration·Firm knowledge
Each paid practitioner seat includes one human Assistant User who can prepare matters and upload artefacts. Queries and drafting remain with the practitioner seat.
Start with the complete platform.14 days free.
Prices exclude VAT.
Before you begin.
A few practical answers before you start.
No. You can begin your 14-day trial immediately. A demo is available if you would prefer a guided introduction first.
The complete SenseFrame platform: matters, artefacts, authorities, queries, drafting, templates, collaboration and firm knowledge, in your own workspace from the first day.
Pricing is per practitioner seat and decreases according to the number of seats in the firm. Every seat includes the complete platform. Prices exclude VAT.
Each paid practitioner seat includes one human Assistant User who can prepare matters and upload artefacts. Queries and drafting remain with the practitioner seat.
Each firm's environment and matter data are kept separate, access to matters is permission-controlled within the firm's workspace, and your documents are not used to train public AI models. Explore our security approach
Bring your next
matter with you.
Start your 14-day free trial and open your first matter. The complete SenseFrame platform is available from the beginning. No demo required.
Trial access is immediate. Guided onboarding is available if you would like it.
Request received.
Thank you. The SenseFrame team will be in touch within one business day to arrange your personalised demo.