Tribuno
A Tribunal Decision Is More Than a Bag of Keywords
Keywords get you in the door. The useful work is seeing how issues, evidence and the tribunal's reasoning connect, then checking those links yourself.
One decision can pull in several directions
A decision is not obliged to fit neatly on a label. One document can deal with several claims, applications or procedural questions and take a different turn on each. Flatten all of that into one headline outcome and the record looks tidier just as the research gets worse.
For a professional comparing decisions, the useful question is not simply, “Does this document mention the topic?” It is, “Which part speaks to the research question, what evidence is discussed, and what did the tribunal decide about that issue?” Those details need to stay separate in the research record.
That is why Tribuno looks beyond labels: the value lives in how separate issues, evidence and decisions connect inside one document. A single topic tag leaves too much out.
Connect the dots. Keep the source close.
Picture an illustrative decision with two issues: one resolved early, another turning on a separate account of events. The label “dismissal case” tells you almost nothing about which passage might matter. A useful research record keeps the issues distinct and shows how each connects to the source and the tribunal's treatment of it.
AI can help organise those pieces for a person to inspect; it should not announce what the decision means. A graph is just a way to show which things connect. That is useful only if the researcher can follow the connection back to the decision and decide whether it holds.
A bigger cluster is not a better answer
Different decisions can use different language for related ideas. Grouping them may help a researcher spot material worth a closer look, while keeping the original wording in reach. But a bigger cluster is not proof that every case belongs together. Similarity should prompt closer reading, not settle the question.
For Tribuno, the point of making connections visible is to leave enough context for a professional to challenge them. Ask which issue connects two decisions, where that connection comes from and what could make the comparison fall apart. If those questions have no answer, the connection needs more work before it belongs in the research.