The EU AI Act is in force. Your obligations are real. We make them implementable.
Legal compliance for high-risk AI systems is not a documentation exercise. It requires design decisions, technical changes, governance structures, and organisational processes that most legal and compliance teams are not equipped to specify alone. We bridge the gap between what the law requires and what your systems actually do.
You know what the law says. You don't know what it means in practice.
Your legal team has read the EU AI Act. Your compliance framework is in progress. But the gap between "Article 13 requires transparency" and "this is what the interface needs to show users" is not a legal problem. It is a design and implementation problem, and it sits outside most legal teams' expertise.
Compliance without implementation is not compliance.
Regulators are not assessing your documentation. They are assessing your systems, your processes, and the real experience of the people affected by your AI. A conformity assessment that does not reflect how the system actually works is a liability, not a safeguard.
From legal obligation to implemented compliance
EU AI Act Obligation Mapping
We work through your AI systems and identify which EU AI Act requirements apply, what each one means in practice, and what design, technical, or governance changes are needed to meet them. You receive a clear, prioritised implementation plan, not a summary of the law you already have.
Human-Centred Compliance Design
We translate specific obligations (transparency, explainability, human oversight, accessibility, data governance) into concrete interface, interaction, and process decisions. We work alongside your legal, technical, and product teams to implement them in a way that is both compliant and usable.
Compliance Audit & Gap Analysis
We assess your existing AI systems and documentation against EU AI Act requirements, BITV/WCAG accessibility standards, and GDPR obligations. You receive a structured gap analysis with specific, actionable recommendations, and an honest assessment of your current risk exposure.
Why this requires design expertise, not just legal expertise.
The EU AI Act places obligations on AI systems that only design can fulfil.
Transparency (Article 13) requires users to understand what an AI system is doing and why. That is an interface design problem. Human oversight (Article 14) requires users to be able to monitor, challenge, and override AI decisions. That is an interaction design problem. Accessibility is required for high-risk systems in public-facing contexts. That is a BITV/WCAG design problem.
These obligations cannot be met by a legal team alone. They require someone who understands both the law and the design, and can work credibly with both your legal counsel and your product teams. That is what we do.
What the EU AI Act requires in practice
Article 9
Risk management
Article 13
Transparency
Article 14
Human oversight
Article 15
Accuracy and robustness
BITV / WCAG
Accessibility
Who this is for
Legal counsel advising on EU AI Act compliance
Needing a design and implementation partner to translate obligations into practice.
Compliance and risk officers
Responsible for AI governance frameworks and conformity assessments.
Data protection officers
Managing the intersection of EU AI Act and GDPR obligations.
Public sector legal and governance teams
Navigating the specific obligations for AI in public authority contexts.
Law firms advising regulated sector clients
Looking for a specialist partner who can bridge legal and design.
Know your obligations. Implement them properly.
A 30-minute discovery call is enough to assess your current exposure and identify the highest-priority gaps.