The law belongs to everyone who needs it.
Whether you’re a practitioner or facing a matter on your own, CommonBench works to the same standard. Choose your view.
For individuals without a lawyer.
Facing a dispute on your own often means facing someone who has a lawyer. CommonBench gives you the same law they’re working from — in plain English, in seconds.
Tells you where you stand.
Whether you have a case, and how strong it is — scored out of 100, with the reasoning set out plainly.
Real law you can look up yourself.
Verified authorities, with fabricated citations stripped out — so the cases you rely on are real ones you can open and read.
Their argument, before they make it.
Every answer shows how the other side will put their case, so nothing ambushes you on the day.
Deadlines flagged first.
Limitation dates and time-critical steps are surfaced before anything else, so you don’t miss the window to act.
It levels the information gap. It does not replace a lawyer.
- It is not legal advice, and using it creates no lawyer–client relationship.
- It is not a substitute for a lawyer. If you can afford or qualify for one, get one.
- It will not represent you or appear in court for you.
- Always check any authority and confirm it still applies before you rely on it.
The law is already yours. CommonBench helps you reach it — it does not stand in for a lawyer’s judgment.
$100 a month — one live matter, start to finish. Cancel anytime. No lock-in contracts.
For legal professionals.
Research across five common-law jurisdictions, at the speed practice demands — without the one failure that keeps general-purpose AI out of serious work: a confident citation to a case that does not exist.
Verified authority, never invented.
Citations are checked against a curated corpus of real reported cases and legislation and, where needed, against the free databases the courts publish to (BAILII, CourtListener, AustLII, HKLII). A citation that is structurally impossible is removed before it reaches you; one that cannot be confirmed is flagged rather than hidden. The cases are real and yours to verify; the judgment stays yours.
Five jurisdictions, one engine.
England & Wales, the United States, Hong Kong, Singapore and Australia, each with its own authorities and procedure. Reasoning is locked to the jurisdiction you select — though which one governs a cross-border matter remains a question for you.
The opponent’s best point, surfaced first.
Every analytical response sets out how the other side will put its case, so you test your position before they do.
Costs, recovery and urgency, built in.
Where figures are in play you get a costs estimate, a net-recovery estimate, and a viability assessment, built on stated assumptions you can adjust. Limitation deadlines and dissipation risks are flagged before the analysis begins.
Document review.
Upload pleadings for a line-by-line critique: structural gaps, missing issues, tactical suggestions. Advocate and Chambers tiers.
Chambers: per-seat, hard isolation.
Per-seat billing for firms and sets, with hard isolation between seats — for teams that need answers fast and kept separate.
Every tier runs the same engine and the same verified corpus. You pay for capacity and workflow — not for better answers.
CommonBench is a research tool and does not provide legal advice or create a lawyer–client relationship. For advice on a specific matter, consult a qualified legal practitioner in the relevant jurisdiction.