A draft contract names a party, an address and a signatory. This review asks whether the company behind those lines matches what the draft assumes. It is a commercial review of public records, kept deliberately narrow: it does not read your contract for legal meaning, and it does not replace the lawyer who does.
The review starts from the party details in your draft: legal name, registration number, registered address, the entity that will invoice and the entity that will perform. Those are set against public records and against the company's own material. The output is a short list of findings, each tied to the party details it concerns, so the conversation with the counterparty and with your lawyer is about specific points.
Only the identity and commercial facts in the draft are used. We do not interpret obligations, liability or governing terms.
If the entity named in the draft differs from the one the public record shows, or from the one that actually trades, the point is a question to settle before anything else.
Where the record publishes ownership or officers, the report lists them as recorded.
Visible premises, staffing signals and product range are set beside the scale of what the draft describes.
Public commentary is read as signals with source and date, and any recurring theme is noted.
The entity question dominates: which group company signs, which one is registered locally, and whether the footprint shows a real support function.
Operational footprint and ownership record matter most, because the contract outlives the first delivery and depends on the counterparty still existing in the same form.
Reputation and consistency of identity carry the weight, since the counterparty will speak publicly in your name.
The report supports your questions to the counterparty. Whether a point is acceptable is your decision, taken with your own legal adviser.
The party block and a one-line description of the deal are enough. Say which decision the review should support and any concern already raised.
The recorded entity is established, then compared with the draft's party details before any other source is opened.
The website, listings and published commentary are read against the record, and divergences are logged with both values.
Each finding is labelled verified fact, inference, unavailable or client-provided, with a source log and a limitations note.
Research reports what can be established from public and provided sources. It is not a guarantee about a counterparty's future conduct and not legal advice.
No. The party details and a short description of the deal are enough, and the review does not interpret contract terms.
No. It states what reviewed sources show and what remains open. The decision and its legal side stay with you and your adviser.
A recent record gives little history. The report says so and lists what you could ask the counterparty to supply instead.
No obligation. We read your request and reply with a straight answer.
Tell us what you need to find out and by when. We confirm scope before any work starts.
Request research