CasePilot | AI legal research and document review

Legal knowledge is only useful when teams can find it

Case files, contracts, pleadings, opinions, and internal materials are hard to search across disconnected repositories.

Information across documents

Relevant context is spread across lengthy files, folders, and systems.

ContractsPleadingsOpinions

Time spent searching

Manual retrieval and review slow down research and preparation.

Keyword searchManual review

Sources need to be clear

Teams must trace summaries back to the underlying material and verify them.

TraceVerifyCite

See it in action

Three illustrative screens showing how the product could work. Sample data only.

SCREEN 01

Matter command centre

Ask anything about a matter, see the deadlines hidden in your contracts, catch conflicts between documents, and map how everything connects.

Natural-language searchDeadline extractionConflict spotting

Matter overview

Supply agreement dispute · 14 documents

All documents

AOKMJT

Ask CasePilot

Ask anything about this matter

What are our deadlines if the supplier terminates early?Ask

Find conflicts between documentsSummarise the delay timelineList obligations due this quarter

Pages understoodContracts

2,318

Across 14 documents in 3 connected repositories

Key dates found4 upcoming

14NovNotice period endscl. 18.219 days

01DecDelivery milestone dueSchedule 336 days

15JanRenewal option lapsescl. 4.181 days

Conflict spotter

conflicts between documents

Grace period10 days in cl. 7.4, 5 days in Amendment 2

Liability cap15% in the agreement, 25% in Supplier B’s draft

Review conflicts

Evidence check

92%

11 cited passages1 inferred, review

Every answer shows which statements are sourced and which are inferred.

Case map6 documents · 9 links

SCREEN 02

Contract X-ray

Review a long agreement in seconds. See where the risk sits, compare it with another draft, and question any clause with the source shown.

AI-assisted reviewDocument comparisonSource-grounded answers

Contract X-ray

Supply Agreement · 48 pages · reviewed in 38 seconds

Compare with Supplier B draftAI-assisted

Risk by sectionAll clauses

clauses need review

§1§3§5§7§9§12

Needs a lawyer

Liability capcl. 12.2 · 15% of orderHigh

Termination for conveniencecl. 18.2 · 30 days’ noticeHigh

Governing lawNot found in the documentMedium

Open 3 comments

Side by side2 differences

ClauseSupplier ASupplier B

Liability cap15%25%

Grace period10 days10 days

Notice period30 days14 days

Ask the document

Can the supplier terminate without cause?

Yes. With 30 days’ notice under cl. 18.2, unless the delivery milestone in Schedule 3 is missed.

cl. 18.2 · p. 31Schedule 3 · p. 44

SCREEN 03

Research crew

Specialised agents retrieve, analyse, draft, and verify in parallel, while a lawyer keeps the final say.

AI agentsCitation checksHuman review

Research crew

Task: late-delivery liability across three suppliers

RADV

Running · 2m 14s

RDone

Retriever agent

Found 41 passages in 14 documents

A78%

Analyst agent

Comparing 4 clauses across 3 suppliers

D60%

Drafter agent

Writing the memo, 3 of 5 sections

V74%

Verifier agent

Checked 14 of 19 citations

Live memo · draft 314 of 19 citations verified

Late-delivery liability across suppliers

Supplier A caps liability at 15% of order value¹ after a 10-day grace period². Supplier B’s draft raises the cap to 25%³, above the standard policy limit.

3. Open points: drafting…

Open in editor Export Word

Needs review2 to review

Supplier B cap of 25%Exceeds the policy limit

Supplier C grace periodShorter than the standard

Source links

19/19

statements link to a source passage

A research workflow with verification built in

A conceptual flow for supported document collections and review processes.

Connect legal knowledge

Bring supported documents and knowledge collections into the system.

Retrieve context

Use semantic search and metadata filters to find useful information.

Analyse and synthesise

Organise evidence and generate responses grounded in retrieved material.

Coordinate tasks

Run supported multi-step research and document tasks with agents.

Review and verify

Legal professionals check sources and make the final decisions.

AI assistance, with source verification in view

Legal work needs clarity about what a system found, what it inferred, and what a professional still needs to check.

These are design objectives. Implementation and availability will be confirmed against the current product build.

✓Grounded answersResponses are supported by relevant retrieved material.

✓Controlled accessDocument access follows each organisation’s configured permissions.

✓TraceabilityResearch outputs make source verification practical.

✓Human oversightAI analysis supports, and never replaces, professional judgement.

✓Flexible architectureRetrieval, models, and agents adapt to different deployments.

✓Professional responsibilityLawyers remain responsible for interpretation and advice.

Support for knowledge-heavy legal work

Four places a source-grounded workflow can save research time.

Case research

Explore relevant information across case materials and internal knowledge.

Document analysis

Review contracts and pleadings to extract facts and organise findings.

Knowledge management

Make organisational legal knowledge easier to search and reuse.

Research workflows

Coordinate repetitive review tasks so lawyers can focus on analysis.

Law firms and legal practicesIn-house legal departmentsLegal research teamsLarge document collectionsProfessional services firms

Questions about CasePilot

What kinds of documents can CasePilot work with?

Supported file formats and repository integrations are still to be confirmed. The intended direction is to work with approved legal document collections.

Can users verify the sources behind an answer?

Source-aware retrieval and review are design priorities. The exact citation and traceability features will depend on implementation.

Does CasePilot replace legal professionals?

No. It is intended to support research and document workflows. Legal professionals remain responsible for interpretation and advice.

Can it connect to existing document systems?

Potential integrations should be assessed against the organisation’s systems, permissions, and security requirements.

Is CasePilot available now?

CasePilot is in development. Contact Oxagon to discuss the use case and future pilot opportunities.

Make legal knowledge work harder

Discover how CasePilot could support document research, knowledge discovery, and more structured legal workflows.

Request a demo