L
Lextel AI

Lextel AI is an AI legal research and drafting platform for Italian lawyers, built on a legal database of more than 8 million documents updated daily. The database holds about 4.8 million court decisions, from the Court of Cassation, the Constitutional Court, the Council of State, administrative and tax courts, merit courts and the EU Court of Justice. It also holds 2.1 million legislative texts, 0.3 million items of regulatory practice and 0.8 million works of doctrine, including notes from Il Foro Italiano.

Deep Legal Search runs an AI research pass across the whole database and returns a sourced report, beside a quicker Legal Overview mode and keyword and citation search. The platform drafts nine types of court filings and legal opinions from material a lawyer selects, proposes replies to an opposing brief, and adds case law to a lawyer's own Word draft. It is sold to individual lawyers, law firms, in house counsel and public administration lawyers, with a 7 day free trial and published monthly prices.

The service is hosted in Europe on managed Google Cloud services. Lextel AI S.p.A. of Rome is controlled by Tinexta Visura S.p.A., part of the Tinexta group listed on Euronext STAR Milan.

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.

BB on AI CentralityThe models are the engine of a core capability, layered on a product that would still function without them as a document or workflow system.

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.

Deep Legal Search is described as an AI agent that reads and analyzes documents across the whole database and returns a sourced report in about five minutes. The drafting tools generate nine types of court filings and legal opinions, Contrasta Tesi Avversaria breaks down an opposing brief and proposes a reply, and Potenzia Atti inserts supporting case law into a lawyer's own Word draft. Lextel AI's pricing page lists unlimited database access as the first inclusion of every plan.

The FAQ describes five search modes, three of which run without generation: natural language search without an AI answer, keyword search and search by citation. A landing page sells direct access to the whole information collection of Tinexta Visura.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Citation Accuracy and Hallucination DisclosureGrounding is real and documented, with linked primary sources and a described retrieval method, short of published accuracy figures an outsider can test.

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.

Lextel AI's FAQ says Deep Legal Search works only on the legal database. Legal Overview answers are followed by a card for each document the AI analyzed, with the full text available, generated opinions keep all their initial references, and Potenzia Atti adds citations to a lawyer's draft as embedded links. A company blog post of 9 July 2026 describes the architecture as retrieval augmented generation over the connected database, and the Legal Overview page says keyword and semantic search are combined.

The home page promises a "near-zero halucinations" principle and a landing page says "SOLO DIRITTO REALE". No accuracy figure, test set or error rate is published. The only benchmark compares the five minutes of a Deep Legal Search with four to six hours of conventional research. Article 4.1 of the Terms, dated 21 April 2026, says outputs may not be accurate and must be verified before use.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Autonomy and Oversight ModelA written commitment that the models work alongside a supervising lawyer, with real review surfaces, short of the full control structure: commonly the threshold at which the system stops or what happens after it is wrong.

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.

Article 1.1 of the Terms, dated 21 April 2026, defines the service as a narrow or preparatory task supporting the professional's own decisions. Article 4.1 requires the customer to verify outputs before use, limits use to the professional and to collaborators with the necessary competence, and treats outputs as "mera base di partenza e/o lavoro preparatorio". The same article prohibits telling third parties that an output was written by a person.

Highlighted principles, notes and conforme or difforme votes on each source collect in the Scrivania and feed the opinion, which the page sums up as "sei tu a dare indicazioni all'AI e non viceversa", and filings are downloaded to Word for revision. No boundary is published for the most autonomous mode. Deep Legal Search is described as visiting millions of sources on its own, and nothing says what it does when support is thin or how an error is caught after the fact.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on Operational and Outcome EvidenceCustomer logos and unattributed testimonials stand in for evidence, or results are quoted with no basis stated.

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.

Lextel AI's home page says more than 4,800 lawyers use Lextel AI and that more than ten hours of research can be compressed into about five minutes. The Deep Legal Search page compares its answer with four to six hours of conventional research on the company's own benchmarks, with no method or sample described. Five home page testimonials are attributed only by initials and practice, such as Avv. M. R., a criminal lawyer, or to an unnamed law firm.

The one worked example is a company blog post of 9 July 2026 in which a lawyer challenges a foundation board resolution and collects about 25 decisions for a summons. It names neither the lawyer nor the firm. Elastic's customer story, quoting Tinexta Visura managers, reports research and drafting time cut by one hour to two full days, with no named law firm. A member offer published by the Bari bar association in December 2025 shows distribution through the profession rather than results.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Privilege and Confidentiality PostureSubstantive published commitments on confidentiality and training use, short of the full picture: commonly silence on segregation between users or matters, or on what the underlying model provider may retain.

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.

Article 3.2 of the Terms binds Lextel AI and its staff to "la più assoluta riservatezza" over the customer's data for the life of the contract and until deletion, except where information is requested by the judicial authority. The data processing agreement, last updated 15 January 2025, limits processing to the purposes of the contract, admits only staff bound to confidentiality and bars passing the personal data to third parties (articles 4.2.1, 4.2.4 and 4.2.16).

It keeps research and case files for the term plus 60 days and deletes documents uploaded for drafting when the session ends. The pricing page and FAQ add "Nessun training dell'AI con i tuoi dati" and that data is visible only to the user on single licenses. Neither document mentions segreto professionale, and the no training statement is not in the agreement. Walls inside a multi license firm are not described, and article 1.2 of the Terms says rights relating to inputs and outputs remain with Lextel AI, its providers and authors.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on UPL and Professional Responsibility PostureA real position is published on advice versus tooling, short of full treatment: commonly a disclaimer without the supervision and competence dimension, or silence on jurisdiction limits.

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.

Article 1.1 of the Terms, dated 21 April 2026, describes Lextel AI as a narrow or preparatory task supporting the autonomous decisions the customer takes as a professional. Article 4.1 makes the customer fully responsible for the result, requires outputs to be checked for content and accuracy before use, and restricts use to the professional and to collaborators with the competence, training and professionalism needed.

Lextel AI's FAQ names the intended users as individual lawyers, law firms, in house counsel, public administration lawyers and legal consultants, and the AI Act page says final decisions must remain human led. A company blog post of 2 April 2026 ties this to article 13 of Italian Law 132 of 23 September 2025, on the prevalence of the professional's intellectual work. Neither the Italian code of conduct for lawyers nor any guidance from the Consiglio Nazionale Forense is named, and no page says the product covers Italian and EU law only.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on AI Governance and Bias DisclosureResponsible AI principles are published without a mechanism, a testing regime, or anything a buyer could audit.

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 Act page says a series of tests and cross checks was run, including analysis of the AI system's documentation and of its privacy and data processing methods, and that the result showed the system "è conforme ai requisiti della norma UE sull'IA". It does not say who ran the assessment, when, under which risk classification, or what was found. The project page names an Operation and Governance unit among four teams and says several hundred selected lawyers were involved through questionnaires and interviews, without describing what either does before a release.

Article 2.1 of the Terms warrants the quality of the data used, "ivi compresi quelli di addestramento", a commitment on training data rather than a testing program. The Tinexta group code of ethics incorporated by article 6.5, dated 23 February 2023, covers anticorruption and data protection and does not mention artificial intelligence. Nothing is published on uneven output across courts, practice areas or periods.

Source: Vendor Published
AA on AI Safety and Data StewardshipRetention, deletion, access control, subprocessors and incident practice are all published, current, and specific enough to hold the vendor to.

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 data processing agreement, last updated 15 January 2025 and accepted with the Terms at purchase, keeps research, queries and case files for the subscription plus 60 days before final deletion. Documents uploaded for drafting are deleted at the end of the working session (article 2). The agreement requires access control on least privilege and need to know (4.2.6), commits to breach notice within 48 hours (4.2.8), and offers deletion or return at the customer's choice at termination (4.2.10).

The subprocessor page, dated 15 January 2026, names four providers with addresses: Tinexta Visura, Stripe, La Tribuna and ACube. It commits to updating the list at least 30 days before a new one is engaged, with an objection right under article 6.2. The FAQ adds that deleting a profile erases searches, highlights and drafts permanently. The security measures page lists encryption, logging and testing without standards or frequencies, article 5 says personal data entered cannot be anonymized, and the model provider behind Tinexta Visura is not named.

Source: Vendor Published
CC on AI Liability and RecourseLiability is addressed only through a standard limitation clause that disclaims the exposure the product creates.

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.

Article 4.2 of the Terms, dated 21 April 2026, provides the service as it stands and as available from its sources. Except for intent or gross negligence, it excludes liability for direct or indirect damage from use of the service, from reliance on its content and expressly from errors or inaccuracies in the output. Lost profits, lost savings and reputational harm are excluded on the same terms, and total liability is capped at the overall value of the contract.

Article 4.1 places the duty to verify each output on the customer. Article 2.1 carries an affirmative warranty: Lextel AI warrants the efficiency of the service, including the security and quality of the data and of the training data, and guarantees availability from 9:00 to 18:00 every day except Sundays and holidays. No indemnity in either direction, no insurance and no remedy for a defective output is published.

Source: Vendor Published
DD on Practice Systems Integration DepthNo integration into practice systems located, or the product stands alone and requires work to move to it.

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.

Work moves in and out of Lextel AI as Word files. Generated filings are downloaded in Microsoft Word format for editing, opinions are copied and pasted into Word, and Potenzia Atti returns an uploaded Word draft with case law links inserted and the original formatting kept. No add in, connector, API or single sign on to a firm directory is described. Article 4.1 of the Terms allows access through one browser in a single tab and prohibits extracting data or outputs automatically or programmatically.

Tinexta Visura sells the Quadra practice management system and telematic filing services under the same Lextel brand, and no published page describes Lextel AI exchanging data with either. The privacy policy names identity providers for login, including SPID, the Italian public digital identity.

Source: Operator Verified
BB on Deployment Model and Data ResidencyDeployment model is stated clearly with partial residency detail, or residency is offered without the processing location being addressed, or the tenancy model is stated on its own with no residency detail published.

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.

Lextel AI is delivered as a single European cloud service. Article 1.3 of the Terms, dated 21 April 2026, defines the Cloud SaaS as "localizzato in Europa" and reserves the right to host it with outside companies, and the privacy policy says the physical location of data will always be in EU countries or in countries authorized under the GDPR. The subprocessor page names Tinexta Visura S.p.A. for managed Google Cloud services and generative AI technology, and Elastic's customer story says the search layer runs on Elastic Cloud and Google Cloud.

Article 7.1 of the data processing agreement allows transfers outside the EU under the Commission's standard contractual clauses for specific processing activities. On tenancy, Lextel AI's FAQ says data is visible only to the user on single licenses. No country or cloud region is named, nothing separates where documents are stored from where the generative model processes them, and no private, dedicated or on premises option is described at any tier, Enterprise included.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Security Certifications and Trust CenterCertification is real and stated, short of accessible evidence: a named standard without scope, date, or a way to obtain the report.

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.

The home page section on norms says "ci siamo certificati" and lists 27001 for information security, 9001 for process quality and 37001 for anticorruption, alongside the GDPR. No certifying body, certificate number, scope, issue date or holding company is given. No report, certificate or request route is published on the AI Act page, the security measures page or the other documentation pages. The security measures page, dated 15 January 2026 and referenced by the data processing agreement, lists an appointed DPO, encryption, event logging, internal cybersecurity and SOC governance and regular testing, and names no certification.

The privacy policy says systems undergo periodic audits by internal and external bodies. Lextel AI does not say whether the stated ISO 27001 certificate covers Lextel AI S.p.A. and this service or another group company.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Model Supply Chain DisclosureThe supply chain is partly disclosed: providers named without change notification, or architecture described without the providers.

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 page, dated 15 January 2026, lists Tinexta Visura S.p.A., the controlling company, as the provider of "Servizi managed Google Cloud, Identity management, Tecnologia di Generative IA". The project page names BERT, a transformer language model, among the technologies behind the platform. Lextel AI's FAQ says the generative AI is "specificatamente addestrata" for the task, and a blog post of 9 July 2026 describes retrieval augmented generation over the database.

Elastic's customer story quotes the general manager of Tinexta Visura and says generation is powered by Google Gemini, with retrieval on Elasticsearch on Elastic Cloud and Google Cloud. Neither Gemini nor Elastic appears on any Lextel AI page. The subprocessor page commits to updating the list at least 30 days before a new subprocessor is engaged, and article 6.2 of the data processing agreement gives the customer a right to object.

That notice attaches to a list naming Tinexta Visura rather than the model provider, and nothing commits to notice when the model itself changes.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Commercial TransparencyReal pricing is published for part of the range, with enterprise tiers withheld, or the unit and structure are stated without the figure.

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.

The pricing page, which offers a 7 day free trial, has two Single License cards, one at 150 euros a month and one at 95 euros a month, both excluding VAT. Each includes unlimited database access and research, drafting of filings and opinions, and no cap on AI interactions, on an annual subscription. Add ons for Deep Legal Search, document analysis and due diligence cost 40 euros a month each. The Multi License card for larger firms, legal teams and public administration reads "Quotazione su misura", and Enterprise is priced individually.

Nothing explains the two Single License prices, and the FAQ gives 150 euros a month for an annual subscription with add ons currently included. Article 1.4 of the Terms renews the contract automatically for the same period, with a reminder 30 days before. Article 2.4 lets prices vary by professional body through conventions, and a December 2025 offer for Bari bar members lists 990 euros for a year against 1,800. Pricing for more than one seat is withheld.

Source: Vendor Published
BB on Firm and Practice CoverageSegment and practice coverage is described with substance, short of the boundaries: what is supported is clear, what is not is left open.

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.

Lextel AI's FAQ names individual lawyers, associated law firms, in house counsel, public administration lawyers and legal consultants. The pricing page assigns the single license to solo lawyers and small firms, the multi license to larger firms, legal teams and public administration, and Enterprise to larger teams. The database holds decisions of the Court of Cassation, the Constitutional Court, the Council of State, the regional administrative courts, the Court of Auditors, the tax courts, merit courts and the EU Court of Justice.

It also holds national, regional and EU legislation, practice from the Revenue Agency, INPS, Consob, the Bank of Italy and other regulators, and doctrine. Drafting covers nine filing types, largely civil procedure, from a writ of summons to an opposition to a payment order, and the page says criminal, administrative and other types are being added. No page says the product covers Italian and EU law only, or how much merit court case law it holds by court or region.

Source: Vendor Published
Sources on file

9 public documents

The public pages on file for Lextel AI, 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.

Pricing

€95/month, Single LicenseEUR, as published, never converted

  • A license for one lawyer is listed at 150 euros a month, and a second offer shows 95 euros a month.
  • Extra tools cost 40 euros a month each.
  • Prices for bigger firms and teams are only given on request.
  • You can try it free for 7 days without a card.
  • Prices do not include VAT.

Lextel AI's pricing page has two Single License cards, at 150 euros a month and at 95 euros a month, both excluding VAT and supplied on an annual subscription. Each includes unlimited database access and research, drafting of court filings and legal opinions, online support and no limit on AI interactions. Add ons for Deep Legal Search, document analysis and due diligence cost 40 euros a month each. The Multi License for larger firms, legal teams and public administration is a custom quote, and Enterprise is priced individually. A 7 day free trial needs no card, and personal discount codes and bar association conventions are offered.

Implementation: None stated. The product is self serve, with online registration, a 7 day free trial and online purchase.

Confidentiality and data terms: Not applicable in the Italian market. Lextel AI S.p.A. acts as processor under Article 28 GDPR through a published data processing agreement accepted at purchase.

Note: Prices exclude VAT, and the 150 euro and Multi License cards read "iva 4% esclusa". The page does not explain why two Single License prices appear. The FAQ gives the Single License as 150 euros a month for an annual subscription and says add ons are currently included in the base subscription, which differs from the pricing page. Contracts renew automatically for the same period unless canceled, with a reminder 30 days before (Terms article 1.4). Two and three year terms are discounted.

Legal Signals

What each signal means

A 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.

Confidentiality and Privilege

Client Data in Training

Can material a lawyer puts into this product be used to train a model?

Never, in policy only

A public policy or trust page states no training on customer content, with no matching term located in the published agreement.

The pricing page and the FAQ state that the AI is not trained on the customer's data, and the drafting page says uploaded documents are never used to train the AI model. No matching term appears in the Terms dated 21 April 2026 or the data processing agreement dated 15 January 2025. The agreement limits processing to the purposes of the contract, and article 1.2 of the Terms mentions training only where the customer trains under a separate contract, while stating that rights relating to inputs and outputs remain with Lextel AI, its providers and authors.

Source: Vendor PublishedNessun training dell'AI con i tuoi datiAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Prompt and Output Retention

How long does the product keep what a lawyer typed, and can that be set to zero?

Disclosed fixed window

A specific retention period is published and the customer cannot change it.

Article 2 of the data processing agreement, last updated 15 January 2025, keeps research, queries and case files for the life of the subscription and 60 days more, then deletes them, and deletes documents uploaded for drafting when the working session ends. Lextel AI's FAQ says deleting a profile erases searches, highlights and drafts permanently. No retention setting is offered, and nothing states what the provider of the generative model keeps.

Source: Vendor Publishedi dati saranno conservati per un periodo ulteriore di 60 giorniAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation

Does retrieval respect the firm’s ethical walls, or can the model read across them?

Claimed, not documented

Segregation is asserted in public materials with no published detail on how it is enforced.

The FAQ and the pricing page say data is visible only to the user on single licenses. Nothing describes how that separation is enforced, or how users, teams and matters are separated on multi license and Enterprise accounts.

Source: Vendor PublishedDati visibili solo da te (per licenze singole)As of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice

If someone subpoenas the vendor for a firm’s data, does the firm hear about it first?

Disclosure addressed, notice absent

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.

Article 3.2 of the Terms excludes from Lextel AI's confidentiality duty any information requested by the judicial authority, and the privacy policy allows data to be kept longer for requests from competent authorities. No term commits to telling the customer about such a request or reserves discretion over notice.

Source: Vendor Publishedche siano richieste dall'Autorità GiudiziariaAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence
Accuracy and Authority

Primary Law Corpus Provenance

Where does the law in this product come from, and does the vendor have the right to use it?

Sources named, basis unstated

Sources are identified without stating the license or rights basis.

The database page counts about 8 million documents by class and names the courts, legislative sources, regulators and doctrine, including Il Foro Italiano, that it draws on, updated daily. The about page says content comes from monitoring primary source portals such as the Gazzetta Ufficiale, Normattiva and Eurlex and from agreements with commercial partners and contributors, which are not named source by source, and no license basis is stated.

Source: Vendor Publishedtramite accordi con partner commerciali e contributor di primaria importanzaAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Good Law Verification

Does the product tell you when the authority it just cited has been overruled?

Prompts the user to verify

The product instructs the reader to check the citation without performing the check.

Article 4.1 of the Terms requires the customer to check each output's content and accuracy before use, and answers link to the full text of the documents they rest on. Nothing describes a check on whether a cited decision has been overruled or a cited norm repealed. The conforme and difforme votes on each source are the lawyer's own.

Source: Vendor Publisheda verificarne il contenuto e l'esattezzaAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Refusal and Uncertainty Behavior

What does the product do when the answer is not in the corpus?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.

Nothing in the FAQ, the Deep Legal Search, Legal Overview, drafting, opinion and Contrasta Tesi Avversaria pages or the Terms describes what the product does when the database holds no support for an answer. The home page instead promises a "near-zero halucinations" principle.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 2, 2026

Fabricated Citation Record

Does a public court record exist addressing fabricated or hallucinated legal citations in output from this product?

None located

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.

The AI Hallucination Cases database maintained by Damien Charlotin records no case involving Lextel or its group name Tinexta. No court order, opinion or disciplinary record naming the product is on the public record.

Source: Bar Guidance or Court RecordAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence
Professional Responsibility

Bar Guidance Alignment

Has the vendor engaged in public with the ethics opinions its buyers are bound by?

Generic reference

Public materials refer to professional responsibility in general terms without naming guidance.

A company blog post of 2 April 2026 names article 13 of Italian Law 132 of 23 September 2025 on the prevalence of the professional's intellectual work, and the AI Act page and FAQ cite the same law and the EU AI Act. No Consiglio Nazionale Forense guidance, code of conduct article or other jurisdiction is engaged.

Source: Vendor Publishedcome richiesto dall'Articolo 13 della Legge 23 settembre 2025, n. 132As of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Billing and Fee Posture

Does the vendor address what happens to the bill when the work takes an hour instead of six?

Savings claims only

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.

Lextel AI's home page says more than ten hours of research can be compressed into about five minutes and lists an economic advantage among the benefits, and the Deep Legal Search page compares five minutes with four to six hours of conventional research. Lextel AI is sold mainly to individual lawyers and law firms, and nothing addresses how AI assisted research and drafting is billed or disclosed to clients.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness

Can a firm get this vendor through a client’s AI clause without a bespoke negotiation?

Subprocessors listed

A current subprocessor or model provider list is published.

The subprocessor page, dated 15 January 2026, names Tinexta Visura S.p.A. for managed Google Cloud, identity management and generative AI technology, Stripe, La Tribuna and ACube, with addresses, and the data processing agreement and security measures page are public. The model provider itself is not named on any Lextel AI page, and no client facing disclosure material is published.

Source: Vendor PublishedAs of Oct 2, 2026Evidence

Court Disclosure Support

If a judge’s standing order requires an AI disclosure, can the product produce one?

Not addressed

No located public material addresses court disclosure or verification certification.

Nothing in the FAQ, the drafting, opinion and Scrivania pages, the AI Act page or the Terms addresses disclosing AI use to a court. Opinions are saved in the matter file with their source references, and article 4.1 of the Terms bars telling third parties an output was written by a person. No record of the model used or of human review is described.

Source: Operator VerifiedAs of Oct 2, 2026
Contact

Correct a record, or ask how something was graded

Every grade and every signal on this index is drawn from public sources and dated. If a record is wrong, out of date, or missing an artifact the index did not locate, send the source and it will be reviewed and the record redated. Vendors are welcome to submit documentation. Nothing on this index is for sale, including a listing, a placement, or a grade.

AI Legal Index

The AI Legal Index is an independent index that tracks changes to AI vendors in legal. It holds 303 vendors across 9 categories, each graded on the same 15 capability axes and recorded against 12 legal signals, from public sources. No vendor pays for inclusion, placement, or rating.

Index Status
Last index update
October 7, 2026
The AI Legal Index is an editorial reference. It is not a regulatory body, not a law firm, and nothing published here is legal advice or a recommendation to retain or avoid a vendor. Records are verified against published sources, bar guidance and public court records. Where a record reads not addressed, the material was not located in public sources on the date shown. See the Methodology page for evaluation standards and limitations.
© 2026 AI Legal Index
3801 N Capital of Texas Hwy, Ste E240 · Austin, TX 78746