Introduction
Vintage Legal is committed to maintaining the highest standards of accuracy, integrity, and transparency in all content published across its platforms. Our editorial review process ensures that all submissions—including articles, blogs, research notes, and book chapters—meet professional, academic, and ethical standards. The review process is designed to promote originality, scholarly rigor, and trustworthiness while providing constructive feedback to contributors.

​

Editorial Hierarchy and Responsibilities
Submissions undergo a multi-tiered editorial review process to ensure quality and integrity:

​

Trainee Editors
Trainee Editors are responsible for initial screening of submissions. This includes checking for:

• Compliance with submission guidelines

• Adherence to citation and referencing standards (e.g., Bluebook for online publications, ILI or project-specific referencing for book chapters)

• Proper disclosure of AI use, where applicable

• Basic plagiarism and originality checks using professional detection tools

Trainee Editors provide initial feedback, flag potential issues, and forward the submission to the Senior Editor with a preliminary evaluation.

​

Senior Editors
Senior Editors conduct a detailed review of the content, focusing on:

• Accuracy of legal research and interpretation

• Coherence, clarity, and logical structure

• Consistency in citation and attribution

• Identification of potential ethical or intellectual property concerns

Senior Editors provide comprehensive feedback, including suggestions for improvement, and recommend whether the submission should proceed to peer review, undergo revision, or be rejected.

​

Editor-in-Chief
The Editor-in-Chief oversees the final editorial decision. Responsibilities include:

• Ensuring alignment with Vintage Legal’s ethical standards and publication policies

• Reviewing recommendations from Senior Editors

• Authorizing final acceptance or rejection

• Ensuring transparency and fairness in cases of disputes, conflicts of interest, or ethical concerns

​

Peer Review
Selected submissions may undergo peer review by external experts in the relevant legal field. Peer reviewers are expected to:

• Provide objective, constructive, and timely feedback

• Maintain strict confidentiality of all submissions and related materials

• Refrain from using content in Generative AI tools or other external systems without authorization

• Disclose any competing interests that may influence their assessment

Peer review feedback is considered alongside editorial assessments to make a final determination on publication.

​

Transparency and Ethics
Vintage Legal requires full disclosure of authorship contributions, conflicts of interest, and any use of AI-assisted tools. All submissions must comply with our Plagiarism and Academic Integrity Policy, including proper attribution, originality, and adherence to citation standards. Submissions failing to meet these standards may be returned, revised, or rejected.

​

Final Decision and Publication
The final decision on publication rests with the Editor-in-Chief. Accepted content may be edited for clarity, style, and adherence to Vintage Legal’s editorial policies. Contributors are notified of acceptance, revisions, or rejection with clear feedback and guidance.

​

Policy Review and Updates
Vintage Legal periodically reviews and updates this Editorial Review Policy to reflect emerging best practices, technological developments, and evolving legal and academic standards. Continued engagement with VintageLegal constitutes acceptance of the prevailing editorial review framework.