A research instrument for common law

Legal research
that cites its
sources.

Ask any legal question across five common law jurisdictions. Get structured analysis with verified case citations, commercial assessment, and practical next steps — in seconds, not hours.

Open Legal Chat → View pricing
3,659
Verified authorities
5
Jurisdictions
~8.4s
Median response
CommonBench · Legal Chat
EW Landlord kept my £2,000 deposit, 3 months late
⚡ URGENCY s.214 Housing Act 2004 · 3-month delay · act within 6 years
Short answer
You have strong grounds to recover your deposit. If unprotected in a government-approved scheme, you can claim 1–3× the deposit value (£2,000–£6,000) plus the original amount.
85
Case strength / 100
Verified authorities
✓Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1224BAILII
✓Superstrike Ltd v Rodrigues [2013] EWCA Civ 669BAILII
✓Housing Act 2004, s.213–215LEGISLATION.GOV
Opponent's weakest point
The 3-month delay is indefensible — regulations require return within 10 days of agreement.
A research instrument for common law

The brief
writes itself.

Ask in plain language. Get a structured, cited, commercially assessed response — formatted like something you'd actually file.

Open Legal Chat → View pricing
VERIFIED ✓
BAILII citation
live-checked
Memorandum · EW Jurisdiction Ref. CB-2026-0418

Re: Unprotected tenancy deposit — recovery of penalty under s.214 Housing Act 2004

Issue. Whether the tenant is entitled to a statutory penalty where the landlord failed to protect a £2,000 deposit in an approved scheme and delayed return by three months following quittance.

Short answer. Yes. On the authority of Tiensia v Vision Enterprises Ltd [2010] EWCA Civ 1224, the court has jurisdiction to award between 1× and 3× the deposit value, in addition to ordering return of the principal sum.

STRENGTH 85/100 · 3 authorities cited · 0 fabrications

A research instrument for common law

No hallucinated
citations. Ever.

Every citation is checked in real time against BAILII, CourtListener, AustLII, HKLII and vLex. Unverifiable ones are stripped before you ever see them.

Open Legal Chat → How it works
>analyse "landlord kept £2,000 deposit" --juris=EW
[14:22:01]urgency scan … s.214 HA 2004 — limitation 6y
[14:22:02]retrieving authorities from indexed corpus
[14:22:03] ✓Tiensia v Vision Enterprises [2010] EWCA Civ 1224
[14:22:03] ✓Superstrike v Rodrigues [2013] EWCA Civ 669
[14:22:04] ✓Housing Act 2004, ss.213–215 legislation.gov.uk
[14:22:05]cross-checking … 3/3 verified · 0 stripped
[14:22:06] ✓commercial assessment … recovery £2,000–£6,000
[14:22:07] ✓case strength 85/100
>
BAILII CourtListener AustLII HKLII vLex Legislation.gov.uk SG Statutes Online
How it works

Ask.
Analyse.
Act.

01 / ASK

In plain language.

Describe your question or case in your own words. Select the jurisdiction — or let the engine detect it. No legal training required.

02 / ANALYSE

Against the corpus.

The engine draws from 3,500+ verified authorities to build a structured legal analysis. Every citation is live-checked before you see it.

03 / ACT

With a playbook.

Commercial assessment, tactical next steps, the opponent's weakest point — everything you need to walk into court or the settlement table.

Coverage

Five common law
jurisdictions. One engine.

Federal, state and territory coverage where applicable. The same verification pipeline runs across every jurisdiction we support.

England & Wales
BAILII · Legislation.gov.uk
1,446 authorities
United States
CourtListener · Federal + 50 states
974 authorities
Hong Kong
HKLII · e-Legislation
464 authorities
Singapore
SSO · elitigation.sg
341 authorities
Australia
AustLII · Federal + states
433 authorities
Every response, always

Professional-grade analysis.
For everyone.

01

3,500+ verified authorities

Curated database of landmark cases across all five jurisdictions. Every citation verified against BAILII, CourtListener, AustLII, HKLII and vLex. Growing daily via automated scraper.

02

Live citation verification

Citations checked in real-time against legal databases. Verified citations get a ✓ badge. Unverified ones are flagged. Fabricated citations are automatically stripped.

03

Commercial assessment

Every response with financial figures includes a costs estimate, net recovery calculation, and viability assessment. The question every client actually asks — answered automatically.

04

Opponent perspective

"The other side will argue…" is included in every analytical response. Know your weaknesses before the other party finds them.

05

Document review

Upload pleadings for line-by-line critique. Structural feedback, missing issues, and tactical suggestions. Advocate and Chambers tiers.

06

Urgency detection

Statutory demands, limitation deadlines, and asset dissipation risks are automatically flagged before the analysis begins. Never miss a time-critical issue.

The difference

How we compare.

Generic AI chat CommonBench Junior lawyer (4 hrs)
Citations verified against legal databases — ✓ ✓
Coverage across five common-law jurisdictions — ✓ —
Commercial assessment (costs, net recovery) — ✓ ✓
Opponent's weakest point identified — ✓ ✓
Urgency / limitation deadline flagged — ✓ ✓
Delivered in under 10 seconds ✓ ✓ —
Cost per enquiry $0 ~$0.40 ~$1,000
Pricing

Three tiers.
Cancel anytime.

Full comparison →
01 · Starter

Starter

When you're being sued and you can't afford a lawyer.

$100/ month
Select plan
Most popular
02 · Advocate

Advocate

When one case becomes three.

$200/ month
Select plan
03 · Chambers

Chambers

Per-seat billing. Hard isolation.

$350/ seat / month
Book a call
Frequently asked

Questions, answered.

Q.01

Is this legal advice?

No. CommonBench provides AI-generated legal information for reference purposes only. It does not constitute legal advice and no solicitor-client relationship is created. Always verify with a qualified practitioner before acting on any output.

Q.02

How accurate are the citations?

Citations are checked live against BAILII, CourtListener, AustLII, HKLII and vLex. Verified citations display a ✓ badge. Unverified citations are flagged. Fabricated citations never make it to your screen — they're stripped at the verification layer.

Q.03

Which jurisdictions do you cover?

England & Wales, United States (federal and all 50 states), Hong Kong, Singapore, and Australia (federal and all states and territories).

Q.04

What's the difference between the tiers?

Every tier runs the same engine and the same verified corpus — you pay more for capacity and workflow, not for better answers. Starter covers one live dispute (~250 questions/month). Advocate adds document upload, costs & ADR sequencing, priority processing (~600/month). Chambers is per-seat billing for firms with hard isolation (~1,200/seat/month).

Q.05

Can I cancel anytime?

Yes. No lock-in contracts. Cancel through the billing portal and your access continues until the end of your current billing period.

Ready when you are

The research is done.
The brief is waiting.

Pick a tier and start analysing in seconds.

Open Legal Chat → See pricing