Private legal document intelligence

Every answer, cited to the source.

Ask your case files — briefs, pleadings, witness statements, exhibits — in plain English. QuaeroLex finds the answer and cites it to the exact page, so you can verify it in seconds. It's built to take the legwork off your team — not to replace their judgement — and runs entirely on your own infrastructure, so privileged material never leaves your network.

Request a demo

Verifiable citations
Flags what it can't substantiate
Runs on your own infrastructure

quaerolex · Smith v. Acme Corp Verified

Inquiry

Is the plaintiff's account of the defect consistent with the evidence?

statement-of-claim.pdf · p.4

“…blade guard failed to engage on 14 March 2023…”

0.94

smith-medical-records.pdf · p.1

“…first attendance recorded 21 March 2023…”

0.71

Reasoning

The pleading and Okafor's statement both date the injury to 14 March 2023.

The medical records show first attendance only on 21 March — a 7-day gap.

Acme's own investigation found the guard interlock within spec on testing.

Answer

Only in part. The pleaded date is corroborated: both the Statement of Claim 1 and the witness statement of J. Okafor 2 place the incident on 14 March 2023. Two matters, however, undermine the account. First, the medical records record first attendance on 21 March 2023 4 — an unexplained seven-day delay inconsistent with an injury of the severity pleaded. Secondly, on inspection the guard interlock was found to be operating within specification 3, which is difficult to reconcile with the alleged spontaneous failure. On the present material, the plaintiff's credibility is fairly in issue.

4 sources reviewed · 4 citations verified

Self-hosted
No third-party APIs
No telemetry
Encrypted at rest & in transit
Full audit trail

See the full security model →

Capability

Answers a litigator can stand behind.

Put a question to thousands of pages and get a cited answer in minutes — then open the source to verify it. Retrieval, reasoning and verification built specifically for legal documents, not a chatbot bolted onto a search box.

Deep Research

QuaeroLex thinks about the question, searches the matter from several angles, reads relevant sections from your documents and reasons before it answers.

Draft reports

QuaeroLex drafts a structured report from your own templates and styles — a first draft to edit and make your own, not a finished document to file. A starting point that saves you the blank page.

A head start, not the last word

QuaeroLex is built to save you time, not to replace your judgment or hand you a finished report. It does the legwork and drafts a cited starting point — every passage linked to its source — so the work left to you is checking and refining, not searching from scratch.

How it works

From a folder of PDFs to cited answers.

Three steps, no specialist setup — and your documents never leave your infrastructure to do any of it.

1

Upload

Upload the matter's PDFs. QuaeroLex reads your documents and figures, converting them into structured text it understands.
2

Ask

Ask questions in plain English. The model answers only from the documents you provided and cites the sources for each answer.
3

Verify

Every answer arrives with citations you can open and check on the source page — so the final call always stays with you. The system flags anything it can't substantiate for a closer look.

Security & confidentiality

Built for privileged material.

QuaeroLex is designed for documents that can't leave the building. It runs inside your own perimeter, and is architected so that no case data — and no metadata about it — is ever sent anywhere you don't control.

Runs on your hardware

Deploy on-premise or in your own private cloud. You own the box; we never need access to it, and there is no managed service in the loop.

No third-party APIs

Answers are generated by a local model on your own machines. Nothing is sent to an external API — not for inference, not for embeddings, ever.

No telemetry

The application doesn't phone home. No usage analytics, no crash reporting, no background calls — it works fully air-gapped if you need it to.

Access controls & audit trail

Per-user permissions scope who can open which matters, and a complete record captures every question asked and every source it relied on.

Encrypted at rest & in transit

Documents and their indexes are encrypted on disk, and all traffic within your deployment is served over TLS between every component.

Your data stays yours

Nothing you upload is used to train any model. Close a matter and its documents and index are removed — the data lifecycle is entirely in your hands.

Need to satisfy your IT or risk team first? Request a demo and we'll walk through the deployment and security model in detail.

First-draft reports

A first draft in minutes — yours to finish.

Point QuaeroLex at a matter and it drafts a starting point — allegations, credibility, the defendant's case, liability and quantum — each paragraph grounded in the file and cited as it goes. It's a head start to edit, check and make your own, not a finished advice to send.

Report builder Memorandum of Advice — Smith v Acme Corp Draft complete · 6 citations

MEMORANDUM OF ADVICE

Anna Smith v Acme Corp Pty Ltd

On liability and quantum · first draft prepared by QuaeroLex

Introduction

I am grateful to my instructing solicitors for their instructions herein. I am asked to advise the Defendant on liability and quantum in respect of the claim brought by the Plaintiff arising out of an incident said to have occurred on 14 March 2023 1. I advise on the papers presently before me, and reserve my position pending discovery.

The Plaintiff's allegations

By her Statement of Claim the Plaintiff alleges that a latent defect in the guard interlock of the Acme TR-200 bench saw caused the blade guard to disengage, occasioning a laceration to her right hand 2. Breach of duty is put on the basis of negligent design and manufacture, and is supported by the statement of Mr J. Okafor 3.

Credibility of the Plaintiff

Two matters give rise to concern as to the reliability of the Plaintiff's account. First, the medical records disclose first attendance on 21 March 2023 4, some seven days after the pleaded date of injury; that delay is unexplained and is, in my view, inconsistent with an injury of the severity alleged. Secondly, the contemporaneous accounts are not consistent as to whether the guard was in position at the material time.

Liability

The Defendant's internal investigation reproduced no fault on testing and records tooling marks consistent with the guard having been manually removed prior to use 5. That conclusion is corroborated by the report of Dr Reyes, who is of the opinion that the mechanism functioned as designed 6.

Questions

What IT and risk teams ask first.

The practical questions that come up when privileged material is involved. If yours isn't here, ask us directly.

Does it replace a lawyer, or write documents end to end?

No. QuaeroLex is a tool for qualified lawyers and barristers, not a replacement for them. It does the reading and retrieval and produces cited first drafts to save you time — it doesn't deliver finished, send-ready work. A competent person always reviews, edits and takes responsibility for the final product.

Can it hallucinate or invent citations?

It answers only from the documents you provide, and every claim is cited to a source page you can open and check. Anything it can't substantiate is flagged rather than guessed at. It's built to speed up your own review, not to replace it — you confirm each point against the source, and the final judgement stays with you.

Which AI model does it use?

A capable large language model that runs locally on hardware you control. Both inference and document embeddings happen on your own machines — nothing is sent to OpenAI, Anthropic, or any other third-party API.

What hardware do we need to run it?

It runs on a server you control, on-premise or in your own private cloud. We'll recommend a specification sized to your matter volumes as part of the walkthrough, and help you stand it up.

Does any document or case data leave our network?

No. Documents, indexes and answers all stay inside your perimeter. There's no telemetry and no phone-home — it can run fully air-gapped if your environment requires it.

How do access control and audit work?

Per-user permissions govern who can open which matters, and a complete audit trail records every question asked and every source behind each answer — so use of privileged material is always accountable.

What about data residency and GDPR?

Because everything runs on your own infrastructure, your data stays in your jurisdiction under your existing controls and retention policies. Nothing is processed by an outside service, and nothing you upload is ever used to train a model.

See QuaeroLex on your own files.

Tell us a little about your practice and we'll arrange a walkthrough — including how a self-hosted deployment would work inside your firm.

No documents required to get started
A real person, not a sales bot