A markup, not a memo
Each identified risk arrives with replacement language ready to negotiate — analysis converted directly into contract text.
Pre-signature and mid-performance contract reviews by Aun & Co., reading agreements the way opposing counsel will — before the dispute makes it expensive.
A contract review for dispute risk is different from a deal review: the question is not whether the terms are commercial but whether they survive hostility. Which obligations are vague enough to argue about, which remedies actually bite, which notice mechanics will someone fumble, and where does the dispute clause send the fight. The firm performs this read before signature — and mid-performance, where conduct and correspondence have quietly rewritten the paper.
The firm reads as the future adversary: every obligation is attacked for vagueness, every remedy tested for enforceability, every deadline checked for a trap. Findings are ranked by severity and paired with replacement language, so the review converts directly into a markup rather than a worry list. On live contracts, the correspondence file is read alongside the agreement — that is where waivers and admissions accumulate unnoticed.
Each identified risk arrives with replacement language ready to negotiate — analysis converted directly into contract text.
Findings graded by likelihood and cost, so negotiation capital is spent on the clauses that decide cases.
On live contracts, the correspondence is reviewed with the paper — because performance history wins or loses these disputes.
A typical engagement: a services agreement at final draft carries an agreed-compensation clause vulnerable to reduction and a termination mechanism with contradictory notice periods. The review returns a ranked findings memo and a markup; the client signs a contract that can survive its own breach.
Described in abbreviated, anonymised form to preserve client confidentiality.
At final draft, before signature — leverage to change terms disappears at signing. A second review point is mid-performance, when strain first shows: positions can still be corrected by conduct and correspondence before anything hardens into a claim.
Survivability under attack: vagueness an adversary can exploit, remedies that fail when actually invoked, notice mechanics that create traps, and dispute clauses that misfire. A deal review asks whether terms are fair; this review asks whether they hold in a fight.
The current draft or signed agreement, any side letters and amendments, and — for live contracts — the key correspondence around the pressure points. The firm returns a ranked findings memo with proposed language, typically within days for a single agreement.