Q
Quillio
Quillio, formerly AI Legal Assistant, is an AI assistant for Australian and New Zealand lawyers from AI Legal Assistant Pty Ltd, which rebranded the product on 16 June 2026. It was founded by Samuel Junghenn, a Queensland lawyer whose Brisbane firm, Creo Legal, was its first customer. Legal research answers plain English questions from federal, state and territory legislation and case law and New Zealand law, linking every point to its authority.
Document review covers contracts, leases and briefs, and drafting produces letters of advice, contracts and submissions. Automated chronologies, a document index and data room, voice dictation and a discussion assistant round out the product, with a Word add in and iOS and Android apps. Two way integrations connect it to Clio, Smokeball, OneLaw, Actionstep, iManage and NetDocuments, and to LEAP through Word. Client data stays on Australian infrastructure, and an enterprise option keeps AI processing in Australia too. Pricing is per user on quarterly or 12 month terms, with figures shown in the free trial.
Quillio, 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 Quillio
Vendors in the same categories as Quillio 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.
- JJurisphereJurisphere is a legal AI workspace for law firms and in house legal teams, operated by Coresphere100 Technologies Pvt.
- SSagaSaga is a legal AI platform from Saga International B.V. in Amsterdam, with Norwegian roots, used by more than 500 legal teams and law firms in over 25 countries.
- OOrdalieOrdalie is a French legal AI platform for lawyers in private practice, in house legal teams and notaries.
- JJimini AIJimini AI is a legal AI assistant built for continental civil law, sold to French law firms, individual avocats and corporate legal departments.
- LLEGALFLYLegalFly is a Belgian legal AI platform for in house legal teams and the business functions they serve, sold to regulated enterprises in banking, insurance, manufacturing, technology and…
- LLucioLucio is a legal AI workspace built by lawyers at Zenlegal Technology Private Limited in Bengaluru, which contracts outside India through Lucio Inc and has users in 13 jurisdictions.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
5 public documents
The public pages on file for Quillio, 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.
-
quillio.au/terms-and-conditions2 signals
Client Data in Training, Prompt and Output Retention
Read Oct 13, 2026
-
quillio.au/privacy-policy1 signal
Third Party Request and Subpoena Notice
Read Oct 13, 2026
-
quillio.au/resources/security1 signal
Ethical Walls and Matter Segregation
Read Oct 13, 2026
-
security.legalassistant.au1 signal
Outside Counsel Guideline Readiness
Read Oct 13, 2026
-
Fabricated Citation Record
Read Oct 13, 2026
No published figure
- Quillio charges for each person who uses it, every month.
- You sign up for three months or a year at a time.
- The exact price shows up inside the free trial.
- New small firms pay a training fee unless they finish three training sessions.
- Big firms get volume prices and a free pilot.
Per user per month on the Professional plan, with no minimum seat count and no setup fee, on quarterly or 12 month terms; a 12 month plan can be paid monthly or upfront. Professional includes AU and NZ research with citations, document review, drafting, chronologies, voice dictation, the Word add in, mobile apps, two way practice management integrations, role based access and audit trail, an admin dashboard and standard onboarding.
Volume discounts apply automatically. Enterprise adds SSO, advanced compliance reporting, security questionnaire support, an implementation manager, an SLA, quarterly reviews and a free pilot, on volume pricing. Dollar figures are shown only in the free trial dashboard.
Implementation: No setup fee. New Solo and Legal Practice customers are invoiced a $600 plus GST training fee, waived if they complete three private training sessions within 30 days.
Note: Plans renew at the end of each term unless cancelled, and payments remaining in the term are still due. There are no multi year contracts. Late payments may attract interest at 15% a year under the terms.
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?
The published terms prohibit training on customer content. Not a policy page, the agreement.
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?
Retention is acknowledged in public materials with no stated period.
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?
The product maintains its own permission model, documented, requiring the firm to keep it aligned.
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?
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.
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?
Coverage is described by jurisdiction with no identification of the underlying corpus.
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?
No located public material addresses whether authority is checked for subsequent history.
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?
No located public material addresses what the product does when it cannot ground an answer.
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?
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, 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?
Public materials refer to professional responsibility in general terms without naming guidance.
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?
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.
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?
A current subprocessor or model provider list is published.
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?
Some elements of the record are available, short of a document level export.
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.