Legal simulators
LiveWhat-if engines for litigation and contracts — outcome odds, damages, settlement, cheque-bounce, tax, and AI negotiation roleplay.
- ✓Court Outcome — win-probability with a Wilson confidence interval, outcome distribution, p25/p50/p75 days-to-judgment bands, and per-judge bench profiles refreshed nightly
- ✓Damages Quantum — award percentiles (p25, p50, p75, p90, p99) from comparable cases, with your claim's position among them
- ✓Settlement — settlement-value band, fee breakdown, timeline, and a settle-vs-push recommendation
- ✓Cite-Chain — counter-citations to your argument plus a 'still good law?' status on every case you cite
What it is.
A suite of ten scenario engines that turn the judgment index and the risk pipeline into forward-looking projections. Model how a matter might land before you file, quantify a damages claim against comparable awards, weigh settling against pushing to trial, or rehearse a negotiation against an AI counterparty that pushes back.
Where a projection needs comparable judgments, it needs enough of them: the outcome and damages engines require a minimum sample of similar cases and return an explicit insufficient-data answer rather than a number when the corpus does not hold enough. Our judgment corpus is a metadata index rather than a full-text library, so on many queries insufficient data is the answer you will get — and that is the honest one. The statutory engines (Section 138, GST + TDS) do not depend on the corpus and answer from rule tables with citations. Every result carries a disclaimer that it is a decision-support projection, not legal advice; eight of the ten carry the BCI Rule 36 wording specifically.
Three steps.
End to end.
Court outcome, damages quantum, settlement, cite-chain, counterfactual redline, Section 138, GST+TDS, drafting critic, negotiation, or a custom template.
Fill the domain form — matter facts and claim amount, a contract plus proposed edits, cheque + return-memo details, or a counterparty persona and your objectives.
Probability bands, percentile ranges, fee and timeline estimates, or a coached multi-turn negotiation — with the supporting precedents or statutory basis attached.
What you get.
- ✓Court Outcome — win-probability with a Wilson confidence interval, outcome distribution, p25/p50/p75 days-to-judgment bands, and per-judge bench profiles refreshed nightly
- ✓Damages Quantum — award percentiles (p25, p50, p75, p90, p99) from comparable cases, with your claim's position among them
- ✓Settlement — settlement-value band, fee breakdown, timeline, and a settle-vs-push recommendation
- ✓Cite-Chain — counter-citations to your argument plus a 'still good law?' status on every case you cite
- ✓Counterfactual — re-run a contract's risk score against proposed edits and see the clause-level diff
- ✓Section 138 — cheque-bounce standing check, jurisdiction options, and the statutory deadline timeline
- ✓GST + TDS — line-by-line CGST/SGST/IGST split, ITC eligibility, and TDS section/rate/threshold
- ✓Drafting Critic + Negotiation roleplay + a build-your-own custom simulator with reusable org templates
Quick answers.
No. Every simulator returns a projection with a disclaimer — a decision-support tool, not legal advice or a guaranteed outcome. Eight of the ten carry the BCI Rule 36 wording; the negotiation and counterfactual engines carry their own, because they are training and what-if tools rather than outcome projections.
Because they refuse to project from too few comparable judgments. Our judgment index holds case metadata — title, court, date, link — rather than judgment text, so for most queries there are not enough comparable decisions to stand behind a number. We would rather return insufficient data than a percentage with nothing under it.
Section 138, GST + TDS, counterfactual redline, drafting critic, negotiation roleplay and custom simulations. Those run off statutory rule tables, your own contract, or a scenario you define, and answer regardless of what the corpus holds.
More in Review & Risk Analysis.
One card per clause type with the quote behind each finding, a playbook for the negotiation, and a renewal pack built from the record.
Three-tier extraction cascade so PDF, DOCX, and scanned bilingual contracts all work — one accept list for every upload door, and a report page that says which step the analysis is on.
Red, amber, or green for every clause, with an explanation and confidence score.
One number, 0-100, summarising your organisation's legal position across four dimensions.