Datasets:
uid stringclasses 10
values | dataset_id stringclasses 1
value | jurisdiction stringclasses 3
values | court_level stringclasses 5
values | year int64 2.02k 2.02k | area_of_law stringclasses 3
values | pillar stringclasses 1
value | series stringclasses 1
value | input_cause_of_action stringclasses 10
values | input_required_elements stringclasses 10
values | input_allegations_summary stringclasses 10
values | input_evidence_signposted stringclasses 10
values | input_remedy_pleaded stringclasses 10
values | input_internal_consistency_signals stringclasses 8
values | question stringclasses 1
value | ground_truth_label stringclasses 2
values | ground_truth_rationale stringclasses 10
values | outcome_signal stringclasses 4
values | early_window_months int64 0 3 | source_citation stringclasses 1
value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
PL-TR-001 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | High Court | 2,023 | Commercial | legal_actors | 3B | Breach of contract | Contract formation breach loss causation | Signed contract late delivery loss quantified | Contract emails delivery records invoices | Damages £450k plus interest | No contradictions | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | coherent | Elements pleaded with evidence signposts and consistent remedy. | stable | 0 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-002 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | High Court | 2,023 | Commercial | legal_actors | 3B | Misrepresentation | False statement reliance causation loss | Alleges false statements but does not plead reliance | No evidence list | Rescission and £2m damages | Missing reliance element | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | incoherent | Key element missing and proof posture unclear. | strike_out_risk | 2 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-003 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | US | Federal | 2,022 | Employment | legal_actors | 3B | Retaliation | Protected activity adverse action causation | Timeline complaint then termination | Complaint record HR emails | Backpay and reinstatement | Consistent chronology | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | coherent | Elements covered with clear timeline and remedy fit. | stable | 0 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-004 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | US | Federal | 2,022 | Employment | legal_actors | 3B | Discrimination | Protected class adverse action inference | Alleges discrimination but facts contradict on comparator dates | No documents signposted | Punitive damages only | Internal contradictions | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | incoherent | Contradictory facts undermine element mapping and remedy posture. | dismissal_risk | 3 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-005 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | Tribunal | 2,021 | Employment | legal_actors | 3B | Unfair dismissal | Dismissal potentially fair reason reasonableness procedure | Pleads procedural failures and appeal defect | Policies minutes appeal email | Compensation and reinstatement alternative | Consistent | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | coherent | Matches elements and evidence with sensible remedies. | stable | 0 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-006 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | Tribunal | 2,021 | Employment | legal_actors | 3B | Constructive dismissal | Fundamental breach resignation causation | Pleads breach but omits resignation date | No timeline evidence | Compensation | Missing resignation fact | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | incoherent | Missing resignation fact breaks causation element. | strike_out_risk | 2 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-007 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | EU | Commercial Court | 2,020 | Commercial | legal_actors | 3B | Non-payment | Contract invoice due non-payment | Pleads invoices issued and accepted | Invoices acceptance emails ledger | Payment plus interest | Consistent | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | coherent | Straight element mapping with proof signposts. | stable | 0 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-008 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | EU | Commercial Court | 2,020 | Commercial | legal_actors | 3B | Unlawful termination | Contract breach by termination | Pleading ignores termination clause allowing termination | Contract clause contradicts | Injunction and €1m | Contradiction with contract terms | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | incoherent | Allegation conflicts with key contract term. | dismissal_risk | 2 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-009 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | County Court | 2,022 | Civil | legal_actors | 3B | Negligence | Duty breach causation loss | Pleads hazard and injury with timeline | Photos incident report medical note | General damages and special damages | Consistent | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | coherent | Elements present with evidence anchors. | stable | 0 | Synthetic |
PL-TR-010 | legal-pleading-allegation-element-proof-coherence-v0.1 | UK | High Court | 2,023 | Commercial | legal_actors | 3B | Fraud | False representation knowledge intent reliance loss | Pleads fraud but facts describe only breach | No fraud particulars | £5m damages | Overpleading signals | Is pleading coherent. Answer coherent or incoherent. | incoherent | Cause of action misfit and particulars missing. | cost_sanction_risk | 3 | Synthetic |
What this dataset does
You receive
cause of action elements allegations evidence signposts remedy consistency signals
You decide
coherent or incoherent
Daily use
pleading QC
missing element detection
contradiction detection
overpleading detection
- Downloads last month
- 5