Drag each gate onto the canvas, connect it to the facts it depends on, then check the graph and step through the verdict.
Type: Exercise block
What it does: Systems let learners build or operate a connected node graph representing decisions, dependencies, approvals, risks, and legal requirements.
When it is useful: Use a System when a matter succeeds only if several related processes happen in the correct order.
Facts on the canvas, gates in the tray: A System opens with the established facts already placed and the reasoning steps waiting in a side tray. The learner drags in each gate, draws the arrows between them, and in doing so states which approvals, consents, and conditions the outcome actually depends on.
Nodes that compute: A node is not a sticky note. Constants hold authored facts, input nodes take a figure or a yes/no from the learner, formula nodes calculate, and condition nodes return Pass or Fail from the values reaching them. Because the graph evaluates, a wrong dependency produces a visibly wrong answer rather than a diagram that merely looks tidy.
Step-by-step playback: After the learner checks their graph, the System replays it one node at a time along the arrows they drew. Each gate shows the value it received and the verdict it produced, so a failed completion can be traced back to the specific approval or condition that caused it.
Scoring and next step: Checking scores the graph against the authored answer — every missing or extra block and connector counts, so a near-miss no longer scores the same as a blank canvas. Authors can add named checks ("the map shows completion cannot happen at 17:00") that are marked individually. A deterministic Next step button names the single most useful missing piece, and an AI hint can talk the learner through the reasoning without giving them the graph.
The situation: Party A is buying Party B. Signing is scheduled for Friday at 5 p.m., and both parties hope to complete immediately. At noon, the team discovers that Party A's board approval was given before one director disclosed a conflict, the acquisition-finance documents are not yet effective, a key customer consent remains outstanding, and regulatory clearance has not been confirmed.
The problem: The client is pressing the team to 'just sign'. The lawyers must distinguish defects that can be corrected, contractual conditions that may be waived, approvals that require a properly authorised decision, and legal restrictions that prevent completion altogether.
The simulation: The learner builds the signing-and-completion map. They connect approvals, consents, financing, funds flow, document delivery, and regulatory gates; assign responsibility; test attempted waivers; and recommend whether to sign, split signing and completion, restructure the timetable, or delay.
The result: Lawyers learn to see an acquisition as a network of dependencies. They practise spotting defective approvals, identifying who has authority to act, separating contractual flexibility from legal prohibition, and reporting precisely what remains outstanding.