Loading
Please wait...
Please wait...
EU AI Act โข Lawyer-Engineer โข Governance in Practice
The AI Act does not generally require an employee called an AI Officer. A central governance function can still help when law, technology, procurement and business teams share decisions and fragmented ownership creates repeated review, delay or inconsistent controls.
Developers of Annex III systems need structured risk management, documentation, and authority-facing processes.
Providers of large models face transparency, systemic risk, and data governance expectations.
Depending on role and use case, businesses may need human oversight, performance monitoring and clear supplier controls.
Need a single point of expertise?
Get AI Governance SupportTeams still need to classify new use cases, review suppliers, clarify rights and licences, monitor changes and record significant decisions. A central owner provides structure without pretending that one role can guarantee compliance.
AI Literacy
Article 4
Measures must account for role, knowledge, experience and context
Risk Classification
Use Case
The legal role, intended purpose and deployment context shape the analysis
Governance Evidence
Reviewable
Policies, decisions, training and oversight records support accountability
Our AI Officer service covers the full spectrum of duties - legal interpretation, technical implementation, and communication with regulators.
End-to-end risk frameworks and accountability structures for AI systems.
Audit-ready documentation and due diligence for external providers.
Design of oversight mechanisms and compliance routines embedded in development.
AI governance is never finished - our role continues as regulations, models, and risks evolve.
Handling incidents and communications with regulators.
Continuous review of systems and external dependencies.
Stay aligned with evolving AI Act standards and guidance.
ISO/IEC 42001 is a voluntary management-system standard unless a contract or other requirement makes it applicable. It can help organise responsibilities, processes and evidence, but certification is not required by Article 4 or by the AI Act as a general rule.
Define roles, responsibilities, and escalation paths across legal, technical, and business functions.
Translate AI Act obligations into operational policies and standard operating procedures.
Embed compliance controls directly into engineering, procurement, and product release workflows.
Maintain reviewable documentation, monitor performance, and adapt to regulatory change.
We embed AI Act governance through practical steps that balance compliance and operations.
Identify obligations, risks, and vendor dependencies.
Create documentation, oversight, and compliance routines.
Keep governance alive with monitoring and regulatory updates.
Legal and technical analysis combined in one function.
Third-party AI tools reviewed before deployment.
Controls embedded into real engineering workflows.
Documentation that shows what was decided, by whom and on what basis.
Bring one AI use case, policy conflict or supplier decision. We will show how to classify it, assign ownership and turn the result into a practical control before you consider wider support.
Bring One AI CaseShare your goals with us and discover how we can guide you through complex compliance requirements.