CoCounsel
Research, summarisation and review anchored to a first-party citator — the most defensible answer in the category to the hallucinated-citation problem.
Tier B — the strongest evidential story of the general-purpose assistants, because verification is built into the architecture rather than promised in a policy. The trade is legacy usability and lock-in maths that the partnership, not the product team, has to accept.
What it does
Case law research, deposition and document summarisation, contract analysis and drafting grounded in primary sources.
Where it holds up
- Citations resolve against first-party primary sources
- Familiar procurement path for firms already on Westlaw
- Summaries carry links a supervisor can actually check
Where it doesn't
- Interface heritage shows; less pleasant than newer tools
- Ecosystem lock-in is real and cumulative
- Premium pricing layered on existing subscriptions
Data posture, as documented
What the vendor's own material and terms say — and where the answer was not published, we say so rather than guess.
| location | Enterprise hosting with regional options |
| training | No customer-content training per published terms |
| retention | Governed by the master agreement |
| subprocessors | Documented; large vendor so diligence is straightforward |
What it costs, realistically
Subscription, typically bundled with research platform renewals.
Who it suits
Firms already inside the Thomson Reuters estate, and litigators who must verify.
Anyone shopping purely on interface or cost.
How we assessed it
Documentation and terms review; citation-verification spot checks planned.
Review history
| Date | Change |
|---|---|
| Sep 2026 | First entry. |