Legartis added agentic workflows to its Legal AI Workspace, so the Legal Agent now runs complete processes from incoming request and contract review through negotiation, approvals, reporting and signature. Legal teams set playbooks, templates, responsibilities and decision boundaries, and the Agent refers any deviation beyond a defined boundary to the responsible person with proposed solutions. Users can create new workflows in natural language, by voice or in writing, and the release is available to all customers immediately.
L
Legartis
Legartis is a legal AI workspace for contract review, drafting and organizational workflows. Legal departments define playbooks and decision boundaries, while procurement and sales teams handle recurring work in separate Focus Spaces. The Review Agent tests agreements against those requirements, and the Playbook Creator Agent turns existing standards into reusable instructions. The Legal Agent can answer questions, translate, draft and run processes from intake through negotiation, approvals and signature.
Deviations above a configured boundary return to the responsible person rather than passing automatically. Test sets and requirement level quality indicators let legal experts correct how a rule is interpreted. Legal answers include sources, while contract review connects findings to the relevant requirement and passage. The workspace operates in a browser and Microsoft Word and offers API and MCP connections alongside DocuSign signing.
Hosting is in Switzerland and Europe, with ISO 27001 certification claimed. Free access includes one seat and two NDA reviews a month in German, English or French. The paid Team to Enterprise plan has custom pricing and expands contract types, languages, workflow controls and exclusion of customer data from model training. Legartis Technology AG is based in Zurich.
Legartis, head to head
Side by side on the same 15 capability axes and 12 legal signals: where the two part company, and what neither one publishes.
Alternatives to Legartis
Vendors in the same categories as Legartis whose graded profiles look most alike, with a line on what each product does.
Similar is not the same, so check that each one does the job you need. No vendor pays for placement.
- DDocJurisDocJuris is a contract review and negotiation platform for in house legal departments, built around playbooks.
- PPramataPramata is an AI contract intelligence platform for enterprise legal, procurement and finance teams that turns a whole contract portfolio into structured, validated business data.
- SSpotDraftSpotDraft is a contract lifecycle platform for in house legal teams and their sales, finance, HR and procurement colleagues.
- DDraftPilotDraftPilot is an AI contract review and drafting product from DraftPilot Ltd in London, built around Microsoft Word.
- LLuminanceLuminance combines contract negotiation, portfolio analysis and automated workflows for legal teams and the business functions working with them.
- TThoughtRiverThoughtRiver provides AI contract review for corporate legal teams and the law firms serving them.
Ordered by how closely the graded profiles match across the 15 capability axes, inside the same categories. See how each axis is graded in the methodology.
Capability grades
All 15 axes, graded from public sources on the date shown. 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.
Legartis sells the product as a Legal AI Workspace built on an agentic framework. Its named components are the Review Agent, the Legal Agent and the Playbook Creator Agent, and every capability a customer pays for runs through these agents. Since agentic workflows launched on 23 September 2026, the Legal Agent takes on complete legal processes, from incoming requests and contract review to negotiation, approvals, reporting and signature.
The pricing page also lists e signature via DocuSign and a contract repository with status and versions. Workflows can be created by voice or in writing and reused across the workspace. Procurement and sales teams work in their own Focus Spaces, under rules and templates legal has approved.
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.
Legal experts define the playbook requirements against which Legartis evaluates contracts. Each requirement has a reliability indicator derived from test examples, and users can correct classifications to tune future reviews. The interface traces review results to a requirement and contract passage; legal questions carry citations to supporting sources. The quality framework names inaccurate instructions, missing context, interpretation differences and invented information as distinct failure modes.
Customer dashboards expose performance within their own workflows, but a reproducible public test set and current accuracy results are not provided. The widely stated reduction in review time measures speed rather than legal accuracy.
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 system works against legally validated requirements and company playbooks, and legal experts rather than the model define what counts as correct. Legartis names four review tools. AI Quality Scores for each requirement appear in a dashboard, and in test sets the user reviews and corrects how the system understood a requirement. Detection of clauses outside expected patterns and a full audit trail complete the set.
It states twice that judgment returns to a person. A human is the final checkpoint before any decision is made on an AI classification, and accountability stays with the organization, not the AI, when agents draft, review or flag clauses. The path for a misclassification is documented end to end, from detection through correction in the test set to the system applying that correction to similar cases. Since the agentic workflows launched on 23 September 2026, legal teams set the playbooks, templates, responsibilities and decision boundaries the Legal Agent follows.
When a deviation exceeds a boundary, such as a liability clause outside the agreed position, the agent refers it to the responsible person for a decision. Legartis publishes no default boundary, and each customer sets its own.
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.
Two customers, dormakaba and TUEV NORD, have dedicated case study pages. Seven more appear as logos (Uniklinik, Emmi, Fiege, Oechsler, Framatome, Zuercher Kantonalbank and Arabelle Solutions). Legartis cites a DPA first review falling from 45 to 60 minutes to under 10, and contract review up to 85 percent faster. It also cites playbook creation effort down up to 98 percent and costs down more than 90 percent on portfolio risk analysis.
Testimonials carry personal names, including Kim Weiler, Dr Marc Hansmann, Cedric Ruepp, Gordian Berger and Juerg Sommer. The testimonials do not give these individuals' organizations, so the figures they quote are not tied to a named customer.
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 home page and pricing page state no data sharing with third parties, GDPR compliance, ISO 27001 certification and hosting in Switzerland and Europe. The pricing page uses the narrower phrase no uncontrolled data sharing. The only published data document is a privacy policy last updated 6 November 2019. It addresses website and account data and does not address uploaded contracts, prompts or outputs. On training, the only published statements are on the pricing pages, which offer exclusion of the customer's data from model training on the paid Team to Enterprise plan only.
Legartis does not address segregation between customers or between matters, states no retention or deletion position for contract content, and identifies no model provider. Nothing on its site mentions privilege, professional secrecy or work product.
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.
Asked in its FAQ who is liable if the AI makes a mistake, Legartis answers that when a lawyer sends a signed document it makes no difference how it was created. The lawyer remains liable, the AI is an assistive tool, and legal responsibility stays with the person who approves the result. A companion answer says accountability stays with the organization rather than the AI. Both positions sit in FAQ prose rather than in an agreement.
No jurisdiction limit is stated, although the product is sold across every European language and legal system. Legartis also invites people who are not lawyers to work in the product. A dedicated FAQ confirms that procurement and sales teams review contracts on their own in line with legal standards. No statement on scope of use for those users is published.
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.
The AI Quality System comes in three named layers, each with a described mechanism. Playbooks and Legal Best Practices with Agent Memory form the knowledge base, AI Quality Scores come with feedback loops and targeted user tuning, and clauses outside expected patterns are detected. Three published articles cover auditable AI, explainable AI and governing agentic legal AI. Legartis distinguishes explainable AI, which shows how a decision was reached, from auditable AI, which checks whether output meets a defined standard.
Nobody inside Legartis is named as accountable for AI governance, no testing regime before release is described, and no testing results are published. Nothing is published about uneven output across matter types or populations, although bias appears in a section heading. ISO 27001 is a security management standard and does not cover AI governance.
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.
Data handling is governed by a privacy policy last updated 6 November 2019. It covers website and account data and does not address what happens to uploaded contracts, prompts or generated output after processing. Its retention section speaks generally, saying aggregated, anonymized or pseudonymized information may be kept indefinitely, and states no retention period for contract content. No deletion position or incident and breach practice is published.
The policy names Turicode, VSHN and LinuxFabrik as third party processors for Application users. All three are Swiss infrastructure and operations suppliers, and no AI model provider is among them. Access control appears only as paid features in the pricing matrix, with role management, document controls and audit logs on the paid Team to Enterprise plan. Personal data is stated to be stored on servers in Zurich.
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.
The legal section of the site footer offers two documents, a legal notice and a privacy policy, and neither is a contract for the service. Legartis publishes no customer agreement. The legal notice is a website disclaimer. It disclaims the accuracy of information on the website, excludes liability for losses from using that information, and puts reliance at the user's own risk. It governs the website rather than the Application.
No indemnity, liability cap, warranty on the service or its output, or insurance position is published. On who bears the loss, the only statement is an FAQ answer on the AI Quality System page. It says the lawyer who signs remains liable and accountability stays with the organization. That answer is marketing prose that puts risk on the customer, and it is not a contractual term binding Legartis.
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.
The Word add in is the main integration, and customers on Microsoft Office 2019 or Office 365 can install the Legartis Word app. An open REST API is described as letting Legartis run as a standalone web app alongside any contract management solution. The pricing matrix lists API and MCP integrations on the paid Team to Enterprise plan. Legartis has no integrations page or developer documentation, and does not describe what moves between systems or in which direction. The pricing page now lists e signature via DocuSign, and the Team to Enterprise plan adds SSO.
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.
Hosting is in Switzerland and Europe, according to the product and pricing pages, and the arrangement is the same on every tier. The privacy policy says personal data is stored on servers in Zurich. Processing location is not addressed separately from storage. No model provider is named, which leaves the inference location open. Legartis does not say whether the platform is single tenant or multitenant, or how customers are separated.
The only related detail is document level permissions, offered as an Enterprise feature. No deployment option varies the hosting arrangement.
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.
An ISO 27001 certification is claimed. The claim appears in the home page trust block, the security section of the AI Quality System page, the pricing matrix and a badge in the site footer. No certifying body, certificate number, scope statement or statement of applicability, or issue or expiry date is published. Legartis has no trust center or portal, and offers no route to obtain a report at any access tier. With no certifying body named, the claim cannot be matched to a register without contacting Legartis. No penetration testing is mentioned.
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.
Legartis describes its own agentic AI framework and does not identify the models underneath it. Its marketing distinguishes that framework from generic language model output and contrasts Legartis with ChatGPT, which implies third party models are in use without naming one. No model or model provider is named, and no notice of change is committed. The third party processors published for Application users, Turicode, VSHN and LinuxFabrik, are Swiss infrastructure and operations suppliers, not model providers.
Legartis gives no location for inference. Hosting in Switzerland and Europe describes where the platform sits. The pricing matrix offers exclusion from model training on the paid Team to Enterprise plan, without explaining the default treatment of Free accounts.
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.
Legartis has a Free plan and a paid Team to Enterprise plan priced on request. Free provides one seat, two NDA reviews a month, basic agent access and German, English and French. The paid plan expands to all contract types and European languages, with custom playbooks, workflows, reporting, single sign on, role management and audit logs. Contract volume and team requirements determine the commercial discussion, and no paid rate or implementation amount accompanies the current plans.
Training exclusion is a paid entitlement. The older Professional and Team rates no longer appear in either the current English or German plan matrix.
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.
The buyer Legartis describes is the legal department and the procurement and sales teams around it, each with a dedicated page, plus a construction industry page. Law firms are neither claimed nor excluded. Best Practice Playbooks are published for NDA, DPA, SaaS agreement, purchase agreement and commercial lease agreement. Paid tiers cover all contract types, and the free tier covers NDA only. Twelve industries are listed.
Language coverage is set per tier, with German, English and French on Free and all European languages on paid plans. Coverage is claimed for companies of any size and industry. Government use is not addressed, and nothing says where the product stops.
3 public documents
The public pages on file for Legartis, with the recorded signals each one supports and the date it was last read. Open any of them and check the reading against the record.
-
legartis.ai/ai-packages2 signals
Client Data in Training, Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Read Oct 8, 2026
-
Fabricated Citation Record
Read Oct 15, 2026
-
legartis.ai/data-privacy1 signal
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
Read Sep 4, 2026
Custom pricing; free plan available
- One person can review two NDAs a month for free.
- The paid plan is called Team to Enterprise.
- Its price depends on the team's needs and contract volume.
- It adds more contract types, languages, playbooks and workflow controls.
- The price and any setup fee require a quote.
Free includes one seat, two NDA reviews per month and German, English and French. Team to Enterprise is priced on request for the team's contract volume and requirements. It covers all contract types and European languages, custom playbooks and workflows, reporting, SSO, role management, audit logs and exclusion of customer data from model training. The English and German plan matrices both show these two plans without a paid rate.
Note: The paid subscription and implementation charges require a quote. Free has limited agent access and NDA volume; the paid plan adds the broader contract workflow and training exclusion.
Tracked changes at Legartis
Legal Signals
What each signal meansA signal records what public sources say on the date shown. It is not a grade and it is not a recommendation. Where a signal reads Not addressed, it means the index did not locate the material in public sources on that date, which is a statement about disclosure rather than about the product.
Client Data in Training
Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?
Training occurs unless the customer turns it off.
Exclusion of the customer's data from model training is added on the Team to Enterprise plan, according to Legartis's main pricing page. The FAQ on its plans page says the Team and Enterprise plans offer an opt out of model training. Customers on the Free and Professional plans have no opt out available to them. No agreement, policy or trust page states what the default is, what is trained on, or whose models are involved.
The privacy policy, last updated 6 November 2019, does not address contract content. The opt out is a paid product setting rather than a published term.
Prompt and Output Retention
How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?
No located public material states how long prompts and outputs are retained.
Prompts, uploaded contracts and generated output have no stated retention period. The privacy policy, last updated 6 November 2019, addresses website and account data only. Its retention section says information is kept as long as necessary and that aggregated, anonymized or pseudonymized information may be retained indefinitely, but nothing in it applies to contract content. Its pricing page lists a contract repository with status and versions, with no retention period.
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?
Segregation is asserted in public materials with no published detail on how it is enforced.
The pricing matrix lists advanced role management, described as team based access control with document level permissions, as an Enterprise feature, and lists user management on paid tiers. Legartis does not describe how any of it is enforced, and does not address separation between customers or between matters. The marketing trust blocks state no data sharing with third parties and, on the pricing page, no uncontrolled data sharing.
Neither statement concerns segregation inside the platform. Segregation is offered as a purchasable feature with no published detail behind it.
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?
Published terms or policy address disclosure to authorities or in response to legal process, and no commitment or reservation regarding customer notice is located anywhere. The vendor has told the customer that data can leave and has said nothing about whether the customer hears of it.
The privacy policy states that without explicit consent Legartis will not disclose personal data to third parties other than its named processors, unless this is required by law. Disclosure under legal compulsion is therefore addressed directly. Neither the privacy policy nor the legal notice commits Legartis to notify the customer of such a request, and neither reserves discretion over notice. The legal notice separately states that data transmitted by users is treated as confidential and will not be forwarded to third parties. That addresses voluntary sharing rather than compelled disclosure.
Primary Law Corpus Provenance
Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?
No located public material identifies the corpus behind the product’s answers.
The Legal Agent is described as doing legal research with references to legal sources and as connected to relevant legal sources. Legartis names no database, publisher, jurisdiction or collection behind those answers, and states no license or rights basis. The knowledge it describes in detail is the customer's own, namely playbooks, Legal Best Practices and Agent Memory built from company guidelines and contract history.
Good Law Verification
Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?
No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.
Contract review and drafting are the main work of the product. A check of authority for subsequent history applies to it only through the Legal Agent, which is described as answering legal questions and researching with references to legal sources. Legartis describes no treatment signal, currency check or citator relationship, and names no primary law source.
Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior
What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?
The product exposes a confidence or grounding score without an explicit abstention path.
AI Quality Scores give a reliability signal for each requirement, shown to the user in a dashboard, and Legartis says customers can see at any time where the AI stands. Detection of clauses outside expected patterns separately flags clauses the playbook does not define. Neither is an abstention path. Legartis does not describe the product declining to answer, marking an output as ungrounded, or stopping when it cannot support a conclusion.
It names hallucination as one of four error types it says occur most often, and calls it particularly critical because it is unpredictable. It does not describe what the system does after detecting one.
Fabricated Citation Record
Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?
No court order, opinion or disciplinary record addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations produced by this product has been located as of the date shown. This is a statement about the public record on that one subject, not a finding about the product, and this signal is not a litigation history.
Legartis has no named tool entry in the AI Hallucination Cases database as of October 15, 2026. Its agents review contracts, answer legal questions and progress configured workflows, with legal teams defining the standards and decision boundaries. Those uses do not supply an error rate. The database covers only court matters that name a tool, so the result says nothing about whether every classification or generated answer is reliable.
Bar Guidance Alignment
Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?
Public materials refer to professional responsibility in general terms without naming guidance.
Professional responsibility comes up in general terms, with no guidance named. The AI Quality System FAQ addresses liability directly. It says a lawyer sending a signed document remains liable however it was created, that the AI is an assistive tool, and that legal responsibility stays with the person who approves the result. No bar, chamber or regulator is named, no ethics opinion or professional code is cited, and no jurisdiction is identified, although the product is sold across European legal systems.
Billing and Fee Posture
Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?
Public materials claim time savings without addressing billing or disclosure, and the product sits inside a fee relationship between a lawyer and a client where those savings would change the bill.
Legartis claims time and cost savings. It cites contract review up to 85 percent faster and playbook creation effort down by up to 98 percent. It also cites a DPA first review falling from 45 to 60 minutes to under 10, and costs down more than 90 percent on portfolio risk analysis. Its return on investment FAQ names lower external law firm costs and avoided headcount growth as the direct return. Its materials do not address what happens to a bill when work done with AI takes less time, and describe no per matter record of that work. The buyer is an in house department rather than a firm billing a client.
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?
No located public material supports a client side disclosure obligation.
The privacy policy publishes a list of third party processors, separating website visitors from Application users and naming Turicode, VSHN and LinuxFabrik for the latter. All three are Swiss infrastructure and operations suppliers, and no AI model provider appears among them, so the list does not say whose models see a client's content. The list sits in a policy last updated 6 November 2019. Legartis offers no data processing agreement, consent pack or disclosure material for clients at any access tier, and makes no commitment to notify changes to subprocessors.
Court Disclosure Support
If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?
Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.
Legartis states a full audit trail in the trust blocks on both the home page and the AI Quality System page. It says a complete audit trail documents every correction step, and that every classification is traceable through the AI Quality Scores and the audit trail, so misclassifications stand out. Review history is listed as part of AI contract review, and audit logs appear in the pricing matrix as an Enterprise feature.
No export of a record for each document is described, the model used for a given output is not disclosed to the customer, and Legartis publishes no disclosure guidance or template for a court.