Legora vs Quillio: how they compare in 2026
Quillio publishes its own comparison with Legora and makes the case on jurisdiction. Legora is a global legal AI platform built around agents. Its Agent plans, executes and reviews complex legal work, Tabular Review runs questions across large document sets, research works across jurisdictions, and Portal shares finished work with clients. It reaches lawyers through Word and Outlook add ins and holds SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 and ISO 42001. Quillio is built for Australian and New Zealand practice. Research answers come from federal, state and territory law and New Zealand law, with every point linked to its source. The product also drafts advice letters, reviews contracts and leases and builds chronologies from a matter's documents. Two way integrations reach Clio, Smokeball, OneLaw, Actionstep, iManage and NetDocuments. Client data is stored in Australia, with AI processing kept there on the Enterprise plan. A large firm or legal department running work across many jurisdictions has more room in Legora. An Australian or New Zealand practice that wants local law and local data inside its existing practice system fits Quillio, which prices per user after a free trial.
At a glance
All 15 axes, side by side
The same grid applied to every vendor in the index, graded from public sources. Hover a grade to see what the letter means on that axis.
AI Centrality
How much of the product is actually AI. Whether the machine learning is the mechanism the buyer is paying for or a feature layered onto conventional software, and whether the vendor is specific about which is which.
Everything Legora sells is generative. The Agent plans and executes legal work across the platform's tools, Tabular Review extracts answers from each document into a grid, research answers questions across jurisdictions, and drafting runs in Word, Outlook and the built in editor. An orchestration layer handles tool routing, memory, model selection and guardrails beneath them. Without the models there is no product left to sell.
Each module is model work. Legal research writes an answer from Australian and New Zealand legislation and case law, and document review reads contracts, leases and briefs. Drafting produces letters of advice, contracts and submissions, and chronologies, file notes and first draft correspondence are generated from a matter's documents. A discussion assistant and one click automations sit on top, and the model is retrained weekly on new legislation and cases. The document index and data room hold a matter's files, but the product is sold for what the AI does with them. It reaches lawyers through the web app, a Word add in, mobile apps and practice management integrations.
Citation Accuracy and Hallucination Disclosure
Whether the vendor publishes measured accuracy on citations and assertions, grounds output to primary sources, and says plainly what its system does when it does not know. Legal has a documented public record of fabricated citations reaching filed briefs, so an untested claim of accuracy is not evidence.
Each cell in Tabular Review expands to its reasoning and the source documents behind it, and Portal answers carry links back to the exact source. Legal research works several sources in parallel, ranks them by authority and checks each finding against primary law before the answer returns. The rebuilt research layer announced on 14 September 2026 runs on an ontology of the law that maps how authorities rank and relate, including amendments and temporal validity. Its AI native citator follows a standard set and audited by former publisher attorney editors. Legora says it has cataloged more than 50 ways AI fails at legal research without publishing the list. The layer is in limited beta, and no accuracy figure, evaluation framework or hallucination rate is published.
Research answers draw on federal, state and territory legislation and case law and New Zealand law, not authority from the United States. Every point links to the source, so a lawyer can open it before relying on it, and the model is updated weekly on new legislation and cases. An unnamed independent auditor tested Quillio against five other legal AI systems and found it at least 40% better than the next best, with the tasks and the way outputs were marked left unpublished. Clients are said to report minimal hallucinations, and every output is meant to be reviewed. No accuracy rate, test set or error figure is published.
Autonomy and Oversight Model
What the system decides on its own, what a lawyer must approve, and whether the vendor documents where the review point sits. A tool that drafts under review and a tool that files without one are different products and different risks.
The Agent proposes a plan before it acts, carries out the work across documents, data sources and tools, checks whether it met the goal, and delivers work product into the project workspace for the lawyer's review and approval. It can also act without being asked, watching email, documents and projects and starting work when something needs attention. Tabular Review adds Mark as Reviewed, Lock Cells and Review Mode for team review, and full audit trails record every tool call, file access and agent action. ISO 42001 covers the AI management system, with human oversight named as a principle. No threshold at which the Agent stops for a person, and no route after a wrong output, is described.
Review is built into how Quillio is sold. Every client is trained on the principle that the lawyer reviews everything, and new Solo and Legal Practice customers pay a $600 training fee plus GST unless they complete three private training sessions within 30 days. Every query, output and user action is logged for supervision and compliance, with logs open to firm administrators. Outputs return to the lawyer in the app, in Word or in the Clio matter for editing. No threshold at which the system declines to answer, and no approval step before an output is saved to a matter, is described.
Operational and Outcome Evidence
Named, dated evidence that the product works in production at real firms or legal departments. Case studies with figures and identified customers count. Unattributed testimonials and launch announcements do not.
Legora counts more than 1,800 teams in over 50 markets and 100,000 lawyers on the platform. Named customers include White & Case, Crowell, Accor, Dentons Europe, Trowers & Hamlins and Grant Thornton UK, whose forensic investigations team has a published story. The customers page reports that users see a 25 percent improvement in work quality, that experienced users save 80 percent of non billable hours weekly, and that firms bill $6.4 million more per 100 lawyers a year. None of those figures carries a date, sample or method. An in house study with the analyst Ari Kaplan drew on conversations with 30 customers in nine countries.
Named lawyers describe results. David Chung, managing director of Creo Legal, says billings rose 35% in a year with one fewer team member, and Roberto Clemente, managing partner of C + F Lawyers, calls it one of the firm's most successful years. Daegan Leachman, a senior associate, and Dicky Abraham of Spurling Legal describe faster turnaround and broad legal knowledge. Creo Legal was founded by Quillio's chief executive and was its first customer. Hundreds of firms use the product, by Quillio's count. The results are the lawyers' own accounts without a stated method or date, and the independent comparison it quotes names neither the auditor nor the method.
Privilege and Confidentiality Posture
How client confidences are handled: attorney client privilege and work product treatment, segregation of one client matter from another, whether client data trains any model, and what the vendor commits to in writing rather than in marketing.
The general terms bar Legora from using a subscriber's confidential information to train or fine tune AI models and require the same of its subcontractors. The terms, the data processing agreement and the security measures annex are published in versions for the EU and the United States, and the annex covers least privilege access, personnel confidentiality, authorization controls and retention on customer instruction. Ethical walls and role based access are stated to keep confidential information from crossing matters or projects, on access control built on the Zanzibar authorization model, and engineers reach customer data only with the customer's written approval. Privilege and work product handling are not addressed.
Under the terms, user content is not used to train Quillio's AI, and each account sees only its own content. Outside technology providers either store none of it or hold it only briefly for legal compliance. Client documents, research questions and outputs are stored in Australia on Australian owned infrastructure, with encryption keys managed in Australia, and Quillio contrasts this with tools hosted in the United States under the CLOUD Act. Inside a firm, access is set by role, partner to support staff, and permissions can be limited to a practice group or a single matter. Privilege and work product are not addressed by name in the terms, and no retention period for content during or after a subscription is published.
UPL and Professional Responsibility Posture
Whether the vendor is clear that it supplies a tool rather than legal advice, who its audience is, and how it addresses unauthorized practice of law, competence and supervision duties, and jurisdiction limits. ABA Formal Opinion 512 is the reference point. Where the advice line is not the duty a product raises, the axis is read through the nearest professional duty it does raise: judicial conduct rules and the reviewing duty for products sold only to courts, and the duty to bill for time actually spent for products that draft time entries.
Legora sells to lawyers, firms and in house teams and describes the product as working with lawyers rather than replacing them, with the Agent's output delivered for a lawyer's review and approval. No position on the advice line, no treatment of competence and supervision duties and no jurisdiction limit appears in the acceptable use policy, the general terms or the product pages.
No warranty is given that the service suits the practice of law or that research results are accurate and complete, and the site disclaimer leaves users responsible for evaluating everything. Quillio frames itself as a tool whose output a lawyer reviews, and it runs CPD sessions on AI use. The site also invites business teams in operations, HR and finance, and individuals handling personal matters or representing themselves, without a disclosure written for people who are not lawyers. Jurisdiction limits are clear, since research covers Australian and New Zealand law and not case law from the United States.
AI Governance and Bias Disclosure
Published governance over model behavior: who owns it inside the vendor, what is tested before release, and what is disclosed about disparate output across matter types, parties, or populations.
Legora holds ISO 42001 for its AI management system, independently audited with ongoing surveillance, and publishes what the certification covers: how AI is designed, deployed, supervised and monitored, with human oversight and structured governance as the operating principles. No internal owner of AI governance is named, no results of testing on model behavior before release are published, and nothing covers uneven output across matter types, parties or populations.
The stated principle is that the lawyer reviews everything, and every customer is trained on it, with Australia's first court sanctions for AI misuse in 2025 cited as the reason. The model is retrained weekly on Australian and New Zealand law, and an unnamed independent auditor compared it with five other systems. No AI policy, governance framework, accountable owner or test method is published, and nothing addresses uneven output across practice areas, jurisdictions or the business and individual users the product also serves.
AI Safety and Data Stewardship
Retention, deletion, access control, and what happens to prompts and documents after they are processed. Whether the vendor states its subprocessors and its incident practice, or leaves the buyer to assume.
The security measures annex sets least privilege and role based access, and centrally stored logs traceable to unique usernames, with security logs kept at least 12 months. It adds data integrity signing, background checks and confidentiality agreements for staff, and retention as the customer instructs. Subscriber environments are logically separated and full production backups run every four hours. The data processing agreement has Legora report a personal data breach within 36 hours and delete or return personal data at the subscriber's choice when it ends. The subprocessor list, last updated 6 July 2026, names each provider with its purpose, data and residency, and a new subprocessor comes with 30 days to object. Penetration tests cover the full platform twice a year.
Data is encrypted with TLS 1.3 in transit and AES 256 at rest, MFA is available on every plan and required by default on Enterprise, and session timeouts, IP allowlisting and forced logout are configurable. Every query, output and action is logged. The trust center publishes a data management policy and a security and privacy whitepaper dated September 2026. Subprocessors are listed with their regions: Amazon Web Services, MongoDB Atlas, Cloudflare and Stripe, each operating in Australia, and customers get advance notice of changes with a window to object. Retention periods for documents, prompts and outputs and a breach notice period are not stated on the public pages.
AI Liability and Recourse
What the vendor stands behind contractually when its output is wrong. Indemnities, caps, carve outs, insurance, and whether any of it is published or only reachable through a negotiated agreement.
General terms and conditions are published openly in an EU version and a version for the United States. They carry numbered liability clauses, aggregate caps that apply across the subscriber and its affiliates, a separate cap of €100,000 on beta features, and a carve out the terms call an Enhanced Claim. No indemnity for third party claims arising from output, warranty on output or insurance position is stated.
The terms, updated June 2026 and governed by New South Wales law, exclude lost profits, goodwill and opportunity and all special, punitive, indirect and consequential loss. Quillio accepts no liability for losses if its security measures or its providers' are breached, and caps liability for alpha or beta features at $100. No overall cap figure, indemnity running to the customer or warranty on output is published, and the terms disclaim fitness for the practice of law and the accuracy and completeness of research results.
Practice Systems Integration Depth
How deeply the product reaches into the systems legal work already lives in: document management such as iManage and NetDocuments, Word and Outlook, contract lifecycle management, matter management, e-billing, and court filing systems.
Legora integrates with document management systems rather than replacing them. An iManage technology partnership works through iManage APIs, and SharePoint, Box, virtual data rooms and contract lifecycle systems feed documents in. Add ins bring the Agent and playbooks into Word and Outlook, EDGAR sits among the research sources, and MCP connectors and third party legal services feed the Agent's context. A plugin released on 17 September 2026 brings Legora's grounded answers into ChatGPT Enterprise. What each connection moves, in which direction and what an administrator configures is not documented.
Two way integrations connect Quillio to Clio, Smokeball, OneLaw, Actionstep, iManage and NetDocuments, each with its own page, and LEAP users reach it through the Word add in. With Clio, Quillio reads the documents in a Clio matter and saves its AI outputs back to that matter, so the lawyer stays inside the practice management system. The Word add in, iOS and Android apps and voice dictation come with every plan, and standard onboarding covers the practice management integration. Enterprise adds SSO through SAML with Okta, Azure AD or Google Workspace.
Deployment Model and Data Residency
Where the software runs and where the data sits. Multi tenant cloud, single tenant, private deployment, on premises, and whether region of residence is a published option or an enterprise conversation.
Legora runs separate arrangements for the EU, the United States and Asia Pacific. Its subprocessor list sets out hosting and AI model providers by region, Microsoft, AWS and Google among them, with EU customers' data held in the EU and EEA. Storage is tiered to data sensitivity, technical teams in the EU and the United States support local clients, and subscriber environments are logically separated. No customer selection of region inside a tier is described, and where processing happens is not separated from where data is stored.
Client documents, research questions and AI outputs are stored in Australia on Australian owned data centers under Australian law, with encryption keys managed in Australia. Storage stays in Australia on every plan, and an Enterprise option keeps AI processing in Australia as well, so processing location is the one thing that changes by tier. The subprocessors handling client data, Amazon Web Services, MongoDB Atlas and Cloudflare, all operate in Australia. No on premises deployment or region outside Australia is offered.
Security Certifications and Trust Center
Independent attestation a buyer can pull without a sales call: SOC 2, ISO 27001, penetration test summaries, a trust center with current reports and named scope rather than a badge image.
ISO 27001:2022 with a yearly audit, SOC 2 Type II and ISO 42001 for the AI management system are all current. The trust center at security.legora.com carries a resources section and a data flow diagram, and the security whitepapers and security measures annex are published without a gate. Penetration tests run twice a year under an assume breach method. The certifying auditor is not named.
AI Legal Assistant Pty Ltd holds ISO 27001:2022 certification from March 2025, maintained at a surveillance audit in March 2026. A SOC 2 Type 2 report covers security, availability and confidentiality for 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026 and was issued in August 2026 with no exceptions noted, following an August 2025 report. The public trust center lists both attestation documents, a statement of applicability and a hosting and residency statement, with confidential items released through an access request. The auditor is not named on the public pages.
Model Supply Chain Disclosure
Which models sit underneath, whose they are, where they run, and whether the vendor commits to telling customers when that changes. A legal buyer inherits every dependency it cannot see.
The subprocessor list names Microsoft, AWS and Google for hosting, infrastructure and AI models and OpenAI for AI models, with DeepL for optional translation and Linkup Labs for web results, each with its residency. New subprocessors are announced by updating the list, with 30 days for the subscriber to object. An orchestration layer handles model selection across tasks. No model or model version is named, and nothing states which provider serves which feature.
A model retrained weekly on Australian and New Zealand law is described, along with an Enterprise option that keeps AI processing in Australia, which implies that processing on other plans may run elsewhere. The model, its provider and where standard processing runs are not named, and the published subprocessor list covers infrastructure, monitoring and payments but no AI provider. No notice of a change of model is promised beyond the general subprocessor change notice.
Commercial Transparency
Whether a buyer can learn what this costs without entering a sales process: published rates, the unit being charged, what sits behind an enterprise tier, and what implementation adds.
No pricing page, rate, unit of charge or tier structure is published, and the commercial route is a demo request. The general terms are published openly, so contract terms can be read before a sales conversation even though price cannot.
The structure is published without the figure. Professional is priced per user per month with no minimum seat count and no setup fee, on quarterly or 12 month terms, and a 12 month plan can be paid monthly or upfront. Volume discounts apply automatically for firm wide use, and Enterprise adds SSO, compliance reporting, an implementation manager, an SLA and a free pilot. The dollar amounts appear only in the free trial dashboard, which needs no sales call. The terms add a $600 plus GST training fee for new Solo and Legal Practice customers, waived when three training sessions are completed within 30 days. Plans renew at the end of each term, and payments left in a term remain due on cancellation.
Firm and Practice Coverage
Who the product is actually built for. AmLaw, midlaw, small firm and solo, in house departments, government and courts, and which practice areas are supported rather than merely claimed.
Legora serves large law firms, small and mid sized firms, in house legal departments, the public sector and professional services, with solution pages for M&A, litigation, banking, insurance, private equity and tax. Multi jurisdiction and cross border work are stated strengths, with research sources across Europe and federal and state law in the United States. No firm size or practice area is named as outside its scope.
Australian and New Zealand solicitors, barristers, in house counsel and judicial officers are the core buyers, from sole practitioners in regional towns to larger firms on Enterprise plans, alongside business teams and individuals. Thirty practice areas have their own pages, from family, criminal and property law to native title, mining, maritime and franchise law. The limits are stated. Research covers federal, state and territory law and New Zealand law and excludes case law from the United States, and the product is built around Australian and New Zealand professional obligations rather than those of other jurisdictions.
The 12 legal signals, side by side
Recorded rather than graded. These are the questions a practitioner has to answer before a tool touches a client matter, and the answers are taken from public material only.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
Under the heading Feedback, Usage Data and no training, Legora's general terms bar it from using a subscriber's confidential information to train or fine tune AI models and bar its subcontractors from doing so. Legora may use usage data to develop and improve the services, and shares it outside the company only when aggregated and anonymized. The home page and security page repeat the commitment as zero AI training on customer data.
The terms state that user content is not used to train Quillio's AI software, so it cannot surface for another user, and that each account is served only its own content. Outside technology providers either store no user content or keep it only briefly for legal compliance before deleting it.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
Section 17 of the security measures annex, dated 31 January 2025, keeps personal data under whatever retention the subscriber instructs during the data processing agreement, and clause 11 of that agreement governs return or deletion after it ends. No default retention period or zero retention setting is published. Backups of the full production environment run every four hours, and each subscriber's environment stays logically separate.
Documents, research questions and outputs are kept in the user's account in Australia, and outside providers hold content only temporarily before permanent deletion. Personal information is destroyed once no longer required under the privacy policy. No retention period for documents, prompts or outputs is stated.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
Ethical walls and role based access control keep confidential information from crossing matters or projects, and full audit trails record every tool call, file access and agent action. Access control is built on the Zanzibar authorization model. How a wall is set up, and whether retrieval applies document management permissions per user at query time, is not described.
Access is set by role, from partner to support staff, and can be limited to a practice group or a single matter, with administrators able to read the audit trail. Each account sees only its own content. Permissions are configured in Quillio rather than inherited from a document system.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
Legora's general terms let a party disclose confidential information when law or an order of an authority, regulator or court compels it. The compelled party gives the other notice of the proceeding where the law allows and cooperates in seeking confidential treatment. The data processing agreement adds notice of any communication with a data protection authority about Legora's processing. No transparency report is published.
Personal information may be disclosed where Australian law or a court or tribunal order requires, authorizes or permits it. No commitment to tell the customer about such a demand is published, and there is no transparency report. Australian hosting is presented as keeping data outside the reach of the CLOUD Act in the United States.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
Legora names the sources behind its research. Federal law and all 50 states in the United States are hosted on Legora, beside SEC EDGAR. European sources include France's Cour de cassation, Germany's federal statutes, Sweden's court portal, Lovdata, Retsinformation, Finland's legal database and Portugal's official gazette, and content partnerships bring in publishers. The Qura acquisition adds a Swedish database of case law, legislation and regulation. No license basis or update lag is stated for any source.
Research covers federal, state and territory legislation and case law and New Zealand law, updated weekly, and excludes authority from the United States. The databases or publishers the material comes from and the rights basis for each are not named.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
Legora is building its own AI native citator on an ontology of the law, announced on 14 September 2026. The ontology captures the hierarchy of authority, how sources relate and temporal validity, so an amended rule or an overruled case is recognized as such, and former publisher attorney editors set and audit the standard. The technology comes from the Qura and Wexler acquisitions. The citator is in limited beta, with general availability planned for the fourth quarter of 2026, and no coverage figure or error rate is published.
Every research point links to its source, but nothing describes a check of whether a cited case has been overturned or a provision amended since. The terms disclaim the accuracy and completeness of research results.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
The Agent checks whether it met the goal and loops back to adjust, and research ranks sources by authority before answering. No explicit no answer path, abstention behavior or confidence value shown to the user is described.
Nothing describes what Quillio does when no Australian or New Zealand authority answers a question, or whether it signals uncertainty. Clients are said to report minimal hallucinations, and every output is meant for review.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, which records court decisions worldwide that address hallucinated AI content and the tool involved where known, has no entry naming Legora or Leya. Legora's research checks findings against primary law, and its Tabular Review links every answer to the document it came from.
The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin, which records court decisions worldwide that address hallucinated AI content and the tool involved where known, has no entry naming Quillio or its former name, AI Legal Assistant. Quillio trains each customer to review every output before use.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
Legora publishes material on its own AI governance and ISO 42001 certification, and none of it engages ABA Formal Opinion 512, a state bar opinion or national bar guidance on lawyers' use of AI.
Several state law societies have issued AI guidance recommending local data residency, by Quillio's account, and its design follows it, though no guidance document is named. CPD sessions on AI use are offered, and Australia's first court sanctions for AI misuse in 2025 are cited as the reason every client is trained to review all output.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
Legora sells to law firms and in house teams, and its customers page reports 80 percent of non billable hours saved weekly by experienced users and $6.4 million in additional billing per 100 lawyers a year. The small and mid sized firm page pitches more matters handled without more headcount. No record of AI assisted work by matter for fee purposes, and no billing or client disclosure guidance, is offered.
An ROI calculator models savings, and a named managing director reports billings up 35% in a year with one fewer staff member. Most buyers are firms that bill clients, and no published material covers how AI assisted work should be recorded, billed or disclosed.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
Legora publishes its subprocessor list by region, last updated 6 July 2026, naming Microsoft, AWS, Google and OpenAI as AI model and hosting providers with their purpose, data categories and residency, and offers email updates. Its general terms, data processing agreement, security measures annex and acceptable use policy are published without a gate. No client facing consent or notice pack is offered, and trust center documents come through a request.
Amazon Web Services, MongoDB Atlas, Cloudflare and Stripe are named as subprocessors with their roles and Australian locations, beside SOC 2 and ISO 27001 documents and a hosting and residency statement released on request. No AI model provider appears on the list.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
Full audit trails record every tool call, file access and agent action, Tabular Review cells link to their source documents, and Portal answers cite the exact source. No export for each document records the model used and the human verification, and no court disclosure template is offered.
Every query, output and user action is logged and open to firm administrators for supervision and compliance, and research points link to their sources. No export ties a filed document to the model used and the lawyer who verified it, and no court disclosure template is published.
The questions both sides leave open
Derived from the records above rather than written, so it cannot favor either vendor. Take these into both conversations and ask each side the same question.
- Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
Which one fits
Choose Legora if
- Your work crosses many jurisdictions. Legora's agentic research spans them, and its Agent carries a task from plan to reviewed output.
- You deliver work to clients through the platform. Portal shares finished work with clients from the same workspace.
- AI governance certification matters to your procurement team. Legora is certified to ISO 42001 alongside SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001.
Choose Quillio if
- You practice under Australian or New Zealand law. Research covers federal, state and territory law plus New Zealand, retrained weekly, with each point linked to its source.
- Your firm runs Clio, Smokeball, OneLaw or Actionstep. Quillio reads documents from the matter and saves its outputs back there.
- Client data must stay in Australia. Storage is Australian on every plan, and Enterprise keeps AI processing in Australia too.
In summary
Legora
Legora is a legal AI platform for law firms and in house teams, sold as the Legora aOS. Its Agent plans, executes and reviews complex legal work, Tabular Review answers questions across document sets, and Portal delivers work to clients, with Word and Outlook add ins. According to the AI Legal Index, Legora holds SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 and is certified to ISO 42001 for its AI governance framework.
Quillio
Quillio, formerly AI Legal Assistant, is an AI assistant for Australian and New Zealand lawyers from AI Legal Assistant Pty Ltd. It researches federal, state, territory and New Zealand law with linked sources, reviews documents, drafts advice and builds chronologies. According to the AI Legal Index, Quillio stores client data in Australia and lets firms limit access by practice group or matter. Its SOC 2 Type 2 report covers July 2025 to June 2026, beside ISO 27001 certification.
Questions buyers ask
Is Quillio a Legora alternative for Australian firms?
Quillio publishes a comparison making that case, built on local law coverage, Australian hosting and integrations with the practice systems Australian firms use. Legora is a broader platform for firms and legal teams working across many jurisdictions. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 13, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Which one integrates with Australian practice management systems?
Quillio connects two ways to Clio, Smokeball, OneLaw, Actionstep, iManage and NetDocuments, and reaches LEAP users through Word. Legora works inside Word and Outlook through its add ins. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 13, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
How do Legora and Quillio compare on security certification?
Each holds SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001. Legora is also certified to ISO 42001 for AI management, and Quillio publishes its attestation dates and report period in a public trust center. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 13, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
How is Quillio priced?
Per user per month on quarterly or 12 month terms, with no minimum seat count and no setup fee. The dollar figures appear inside a free trial that needs no sales call, and volume discounts apply for firm wide use. From the AI Legal Index, based on each vendor's own published materials as of October 13, 2026. No vendor pays for placement.
Neither vendor paid for inclusion, placement or a grade, and neither reviewed this page before it published. Everything on it comes from public material on the dates shown. How the index grades.
Quillio is the trading name of AI Legal Assistant Pty Ltd and publishes its own comparison with Legora. Neither vendor reviewed this page.