Two things happened to legal AI in India between mid-2025 and mid-2026: the tools got dramatically better, and the cost of using them carelessly became career-ending. The Supreme Court now treats unverified AI citations as professional misconduct; meanwhile SCC Online and Manupatra shipped grounded AI research with published prices, AI-native startups made research and drafting affordable for solo advocates, and Harvey and Legora — long dismissed as tools that ignore India — signed India's largest firms. This guide maps the whole 2026 field honestly: eighteen tools by category, a twelve-capability matrix, real INR pricing, and a way to choose. For the international picture, pair it with our global buyer's guide.
Why 2026 Changed the Calculus
On 2 July 2026, the Supreme Court decided Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd (2026 INSC 668) — and turned citation verification from good practice into a survival requirement. The Court set aside NCLT and NCLAT orders in an insolvency matter that rested on AI-generated fake precedents: of six authorities relied on, three did not exist at all and three carried invented paragraphs or a wrong title. It mandated a "zero-tolerance mode for producing, citing or using AI-generated precedents without verification", held that citing such judgments without verification is misconduct on the part of an advocate, and declared that a decision tainted by even an iota of fake material is "no decision in the eyes of the law" — void, whether or not the fake material mattered to the outcome. Justice Narasimha likened hallucinated precedents to "the release of methyl isocyanate in the province of law and justice." The Bar Council of India — which had already told Parliament that advocates cannot shift responsibility for fake citations to technology — was directed to frame disciplinary norms. The Court was equally clear that the ruling has no bearing on the rightful use of AI: the line is verification, not abstinence.
The ruling did not arrive in a vacuum. The Supreme Court's AI Committee published draft Regulations for Use of AI in Courts, 2026 in June 2026, including a proposed requirement that lawyers disclose AI-assisted material at filing; the Kerala High Court's July 2025 policy already bars unvetted cloud AI tools in the district judiciary. Meanwhile the infrastructure kept compounding: over 660 crore pages of court records digitised and roughly 1.07 crore cases e-filed under the ₹7,210-crore eCourts Phase III programme (as of January 2026); the GST Appellate Tribunal finally operational — launched September 2025, adjudicating from February 2026, with mandatory e-filing and a legacy-appeal deadline of 31 July 2026; and the DPDP Rules, 2025 notified in November 2025, phasing in through May 2027. The upshot for tool selection: verified-citation tooling is no longer a productivity nicety — it is what stands between an advocate and a misconduct finding — and data handling is about to be a statutory question, not a preference. Our hallucinations state-of-play and India mid-year update cover both threads in depth.
The 2026 Landscape, Tool by Tool
India's legal AI market is no longer thin — it is crowded and uneven. The map below goes category by category: research assistants, courtroom infrastructure, contract operations, global enterprise platforms, and unified workspaces — one honest profile each, limitations included.
Research & AI Assistants
SCC Online AI Pro (Eastern Book Company) launched on Republic Day 2026: a retrieval-based AI layer on the SCC Online Web Edition, grounded exclusively in EBC's editorial database, answering factual scenarios with structured issue–law–analysis reports, hyperlinked citations, and TruePrint page-accurate replicas of the printed reporter — the citation brand Indian courts trust most. Pricing is published and self-serve: AI Pro ₹51,500, AI Pro Corp ₹66,500, and the top tier AI Pro Plus ₹67,500 per user/year plus GST, the Plus tier spanning 400+ databases including foreign courts. The trade-offs: the AI works only on SCC's own corpus — no uploads, review, translation, or chronologies — and it is too new for independent accuracy data. See Judicio vs SCC Online AI Pro.
Manupatra, India's longest-running online legal database, launched AI Search in December 2025 — grounded in its own curated corpus, with per-result analysis of facts, issues, arguments, and ratio — alongside Manuworks, a pay-as-you-go toolkit (1 credit = ₹1) covering OCR, summaries, translation at 20 credits/page, timelines at 8 credits/page, a Drafter at 50 credits/query, and a Citation Verifier at 1 credit/citation. Research plans are published (₹14,250–₹55,460/year by court coverage) and AI Search starts at ₹6,000/year — the cheapest credible AI entry among the incumbents, and the only incumbent offering translation, OCR, and timelines. The caveats: research, AI Search, and Manuworks are separate purchases — total cost is opaque despite published parts — and reviewers flag the interface as dated. See Judicio vs Manupatra.
CaseMine (Gauge Data Solutions) pairs CaseIQ — upload a pleading and it maps relevant precedents, including arguments you missed — with AMICUS, a GPT-powered assistant, across India, the US, and UK & Ireland: the widest foreign coverage of any Indian-origin player. Its quiet differentiator is a citator with negative-treatment flags included at the entry tier — a good-law signal most Indian AI rivals lack. It is freemium and self-serve, but publicly priced in USD ($49–$149.99/month; Indian pricing effectively on request), and it offers no translation, timelines, or Word add-in. See Judicio vs CaseMine.
Jhana.ai markets itself as "India's first AI paralegal": cited research over a claimed 16M+ document archive (a vendor figure, not independently audited), agentic drafting to court-ready DOCX with comments and tracked changes, voice-to-draft dictation (Steno), and bulk review (Suit). It has a genuine free tier, with Basic at ₹3,300/month and Pro at ₹5,000/month plus GST (vendor-set figures relayed via third-party captures), and a public-sector arm working with courts. Treat its traction claims as vendor-reported, and note there is no editorial citator or good-law layer. See Judicio vs Jhana.ai.
Lexlegis.ai (Mumbai) fields MIRA, a domain-trained assistant built on a 10M+ document corpus, historically deepest in tax law. It publishes straightforward pricing (Professional ₹9,000/user/month, Enterprise ₹17,250, 20% off annually, 7-day trial) and — alone among the research assistants profiled here — ships a native Microsoft Word add-in. Its 2026 story is sovereignty: hosting on L&T's India sovereign cloud and an air-gapped desktop appliance for offline judicial and government work (both February 2026). The founder's launch-era "80–90% accurate" claim remains the only accuracy figure — no independent benchmark, citator, or published court-wise coverage map exists.
VIDUR (KonProz) is the specialist: expert-curated AI for Indian tax, corporate, and regulatory law, with knowledge licensed from 250+ practitioners and Bharat Law Publishers, WhatsApp access, and a timely GSTAT appeal-filing tool (₹12,000 plus GST for five appeals). ICAI-discounted tiers run ₹4,999–₹14,999 plus GST per year with a 30-day trial. It is not a general litigation research platform — but for CA-adjacent tax practices it is hard to beat on price.
LegitQuest combines a deep historical judgment database (Supreme Court including Privy Council and Federal Court era, all High Courts, tribunals — coverage back to 1837) with gen-AI research (iSearch and the ZAIAN assistant), judgment-insight extraction (iDRAF), judge analytics, and a litigation-risk data business (LIBIL). IndusLaw named it its AI partner for a 2025 proof of concept. Pricing is only partially public — an enterprise tier "starting ₹29,500" appears on its registration page while third-party listings conflict — so treat cost as quote-driven; there is a 3-day card-free trial.
Niyam AI is the earliest-stage entrant here, and every claim should be read as vendor-only: cited research, drafting, contract review, OCR, and Indian-language translation over a corpus it states at "more than 72,000 judgments" — small against peers claiming millions. Its pricing surfaces are inconsistent (a credits model with a ₹100-hold trial alongside a plans page listing a ₹99 Daily Pass and ₹11,999/year Pro), which suggests packaging still in flux. The aggressive price floor is real; third-party validation of accuracy or traction does not yet exist. See Judicio vs Niyam.
The free tier matters in a market of two million enrolled advocates. KanoonGPT offers a structured Bare Acts library with simplified explanations and diglot translations on a free weekly allowance (paid listings conflict at ₹699–₹899/month); NyayGuru answers in Hindi, English, and regional languages with 100 free queries a month; and Indian Kanoon itself remains the free database every Indian lawyer verifies against. The caution is equally real: these consumer-grade tools lack verifiable citations to true-copy judgments, free tiers carry confidentiality risk, and the Bombay High Court imposed ₹50,000 in costs in January 2026 for a filing built on an untraceable AI-cited judgment. Orientation, yes; court filings, no.
Courtroom & Dictation: Adalat AI
Adalat AI is not a lawyer-facing research tool — it is the non-profit "courtroom OS" wiring the judiciary itself: real-time multilingual speech-to-text for hearings and depositions, case-flow management, and legal translation, deployed free in 4,000+ courtrooms across nine states — roughly a tenth of India's judiciary. The Kerala High Court made it mandatory statewide for witness-deposition recording, and it won IndiaAI Mission backing. The significance for practitioners is directional: the courts you appear in are adopting AI infrastructure faster than most chambers are.
Contracts & Legal Operations
SpotDraft is India's best-funded legal-tech export ($92M raised, including a Qualcomm Ventures extension in January 2026): AI-native contract lifecycle management with VerifAI review, Word-based redlining, and an on-device (no-cloud) review capability in limited availability. It is enterprise CLM — sales-led, quote-priced (third-party data suggests a ~$25,000/year median), with no research or litigation surface. Legistify targets Indian enterprise legal operations — litigation tracking, CLM, IP, and notices in its LegisTrak suite, with an embedded AI workspace (Codex) and a strong claimed PSU and enterprise logo list. One honesty note from its own documentation: its AI runs on general-purpose models without a proprietary Indian judgment corpus, so its research mode carries the hallucination risk that grounded databases exist to solve. Both are systems of record; pair them with a cited analysis tool — see AI contract review for Indian contracts.
Global Platforms in India
For years the standard advice — including in earlier versions of this guide — was that global platforms ignore India. In 2026 that framing is wrong. The accurate version: global enterprise platforms arrived, but they remain sales-led, enterprise-priced, and dependent on Indian partners for Indian content.
Harvey now counts three of India's most prominent firms as deployments — Shardul Amarchand Mangaldas firm-wide across all seven offices (June 2025), AZB & Partners globally (September 2025), and S&A Law Offices (May 2025) — opened a Bengaluru office in November 2025, and announced an SCC Online partnership in January 2026 that surfaces SCC content inside Harvey for mutual customers. What has not changed: Harvey has no Indian case-law or statute corpus of its own, and pricing is unpublished, with third-party reports of $1,200–$2,000+/seat/month, ~20–50-seat floors, and annual minimums around $288K–$360K — a commitment that excludes everyone below BigLaw. Indian firms use it for transactional and document work, not Indian research. Legora is the other verified story: Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas chose it as firm-wide GenAI partner in July 2025 after a 380-lawyer, three-platform pilot (Harvey among them), and its January 2026 exclusive Manupatra arrangement makes it the only global platform surfacing Manupatra's Indian content — though users need valid subscriptions to both platforms. Reported pricing runs $300–$800/seat/month with a ~10-seat minimum. CoCounsel (Thomson Reuters) has no verified Indian law-firm announcements, and Westlaw's Indian archive is frozen at March 2021 — fine for document workflows, useless for Indian research. Lexis+ AI made real 2026 India moves — Case Analysis India (February 2026) adds treatment signals for Indian case law, and Protégé Workflow launched in India in April 2026 — but the workflow tool launched standalone, with Indian content integration promised rather than shipped.
Unified Workspaces
Most Indian tools are point solutions; two platforms span the workflow. Judicio runs seven tools on one upload — Research, Drafting, Document Review, Review Matrix, Timeline, Translation, and Case Strategy — with Indian Kanoon coverage (Supreme Court, all High Courts, NCLT, NCLAT) alongside 100+ global jurisdictions, all 22 scheduled languages, and published self-serve pricing from ₹9,999/month; the matrix below shows where it is strong and where it is honest about gaps. Lucio is India's closest answer to Harvey and Legora: an India-founded workspace with verified deployments at Trilegal and Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas, published flat pricing at $149/seat/month, and translation plus chronology features tuned to Indian litigation. It raised a $5M seed in October 2025 — real momentum, though its research corpus depth has no independent benchmark and seed-stage scale is a durability consideration.
India Capability Matrix: 12 Capabilities, 9 Tools
Every cell below is scored for Indian practice specifically, from vendor documentation and the reporting compiled in July 2026. "Partial" means limited, credit-metered, undocumented in scope, or available only through a workaround — it is the most common honest answer in this market.
| Capability | Judicio | SCC Online AI Pro | Manupatra | CaseMine | Jhana | Lexlegis MIRA | LegitQuest | SpotDraft | Harvey |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Indian case-law research with citations | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | Partial* |
| Good-law / citator signal | Partial | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No | No | No | No |
| Indian statute coverage (incl. BNS/BNSS/BSA era) | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial | Yes | Partial | Partial | No | Partial* |
| Document review of your uploads | Yes | No | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial | Yes | Yes |
| Structured extraction (matrix / tables) | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | Yes | Yes | Partial | Yes | Yes |
| Chronologies from case files | Yes | No | Yes | No | Partial | No | No | No | Partial |
| Indian-language translation (22 scheduled languages) | Yes | No | Partial | No | Partial | No | No | No | Partial |
| Drafting with tracked changes | Yes | No | Partial | Partial | Yes | Partial | Partial | Yes | Partial |
| Case strategy / moot court | Yes | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | Partial | No | Partial |
| Team collaboration | Yes† | No | Partial | Partial | Yes | No | Partial | Yes | Yes |
| Self-serve free trial | Yes | Partial | Partial | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | No | No |
| Published pricing | Yes | Yes | Yes | Partial | Yes | Yes | Partial | No | No |
Yes full support · Partial limited, metered, or undocumented in scope · No not offered. * Harvey's Indian research access comes via its January 2026 SCC Online partnership and requires active subscriptions to both platforms. † Judicio's live collaboration ships on the Organisation plan (₹24,999/seat/month, 2–20 seats). Judicio's good-law signal is treatment analysis (followed / distinguished / overruled / superseded) on authorities cited in Case Strategy reports — it does not claim a standalone citator in Research.
What It Costs: INR Pricing Compared
India is the rare legal AI market where most serious vendors publish prices. Bar lengths compare the approximate top of each tool's per-seat monthly cost (annual plans converted to monthly equivalents); the value text carries the precise published range. Harvey anchors the far end of the scale.
Published prices where vendors publish them; "reported" figures are third-party estimates. Figures indicative — confirm with vendor.
| Tool | Published INR pricing (July 2026) | Buying model |
|---|---|---|
| Judicio | ₹9,999/mo Starter · ₹19,999/mo Professional with Deep Mode · ₹24,999/seat/mo Organisation (2–20 seats, pooled credits) | Self-serve; 7-day trial, 500 credits, Deep Mode included, no card |
| SCC Online AI Pro | ₹51,500 AI Pro · ₹66,500 AI Pro Corp · ₹67,500 AI Pro Plus, per user/yr + GST | Self-serve subscription; Web Edition bundled |
| Manupatra | Plans ₹14,250–₹55,460/yr · AI Search from ₹6,000/yr · Manuworks credits (1 credit = ₹1, min ₹10,000 wallet) | Self-serve modules; enterprise quoted |
| Jhana.ai | Free tier · ₹3,300/mo Basic · ₹5,000/mo Pro (+18% GST) · enterprise from ₹54,000/mo for 15 users — vendor-set, relayed via third parties | Self-serve; enterprise sales-led |
| Lexlegis.ai | ₹9,000/user/mo Professional · ₹17,250 Enterprise · annual −20% | Self-serve; 7-day trial, no card |
| CaseMine | USD-listed: $49–$149.99/mo; INR pricing effectively on request | Freemium, self-serve, no lock-in |
| VIDUR | Discounted tiers ₹4,999–₹14,999/yr + GST (MRP ₹10,000–₹36,000) · GSTAT appeal tool ₹12,000 + GST for 5 appeals | Self-serve; 30-day trial |
| LegitQuest | Enterprise "from ₹29,500" on vendor page; seat prices not rendered publicly; third-party listings conflict | Self-serve trial; quote-driven |
| Niyam AI | ₹99 Daily Pass · ₹11,999/yr Pro listed alongside a credits model — packaging in flux; hedge accordingly | Self-serve; card-verified trial |
| KanoonGPT / NyayGuru | Free tiers; paid listings conflict (₹699–₹899/mo KanoonGPT; NyayGuru paid plans unpublished) | Self-serve |
| Harvey / Legora / SpotDraft / Legistify | Not published — reported $1,200–$2,000+/seat/mo (Harvey), $300–$800/seat/mo (Legora); CLM contracts typically five-to-six-figure USD annually | Sales-led, annual contracts, seat minimums |
All third-party figures are estimates, not vendor rate cards. Figures indicative — confirm with vendor.
What Only Judicio Adds for Indian Practice
Full disclosure: Judicio is our platform. The matrix above shows the field honestly — SCC and Manupatra have editorial corpora and citators Judicio does not claim; Jhana is cheaper. What no other tool in this guide combines:
- Indian Kanoon plus the world in one tool. Research covers the Supreme Court, all High Courts, NCLT, and NCLAT via Indian Kanoon alongside 33 dedicated databases across 100+ jurisdictions — a GST question and a Singapore-seated arbitration question run in the same workspace. Answers carry formal citation strings, and every cited web source is archived as a permanent PDF, exportable as an evidence pack: the verification trail the zero-tolerance standard demands.
- All 22 scheduled languages, format preserved. Translation handles 100+ languages including every scheduled Indian language, with layout, tables, and schedules intact, at 1 credit per page — for multi-state litigation where the evidence arrives in Marathi and the client reads Tamil.
- India-specific templates. 500+ expert-built templates include POSH compliance, IBC matters, and FIR and chargesheet review workflows — not US playbooks with the names changed.
- Side-aware Case Strategy with a moot court simulator. Case Strategy asks which seat you argue from — petitioner, respondent, accused, prosecution, or a custom side — then builds numbered grounds with strength ratings, the other side's best arguments with prepared rebuttals, and authorities verified against fetched full text (verified / mismatch / unresolvable) with treatment analysis (followed / distinguished / overruled / superseded). The moot court simulator adds an AI bench that interjects and an AI opposing counsel briefed on the other side's best case — juniors rehearse against a hostile bench before the hearing, not during it.
- Organisation-plan collaboration built for chambers. Collaboration gives item-level sharing of any research session, draft, review, or strategy report as editor or viewer, live co-work with presence and edit locks, and a searchable activity trail — private by default, with no implicit access for org admins, and one GST-ready invoice.
- A drafting-to-review loop that ends in Word. Drafting starts from a brief, template, or your own precedent, with every AI edit arriving as a tracked change; exports carry native Word revision marks. Document Review and the Review Matrix then run the other side's documents — or your own draft — through checklists cited to clause and page.
Plans: ₹9,999/month Starter; ₹19,999/month Professional with Deep Mode; ₹24,999/seat/month Organisation — with a 7-day free trial (500 credits, Deep Mode included, no card required).
Mapping Tools to Indian Workflows
Writ petition research. Frame the constitutional question in plain language, pull SC and HC authority with pinpoint citations, then verify every case before filing — the non-negotiable step after Pooja Ramesh Singh. SCC Online AI Pro and Manupatra AI Search excel where their editorial corpora run deepest; Judicio adds archived-source evidence packs and a chronology built from your own case files. Walkthroughs: researching Indian case law with AI and analysing SC and HC judgments.
GST and tax matters. With GSTAT adjudicating from February 2026 and a legacy-appeal backlog estimated in the lakhs, tax research tooling finally matters at tribunal scale: VIDUR (with its GSTAT appeal-filing tool) and Taxmann's AI sit closest to the tax bar, while Judicio's research handles GST questions with ITAT coverage and archives every circular and ruling it cites. Full workflow: AI for GST and tax legal research in India.
Multi-state litigation translation. Evidence in one scheduled language, proceedings in another: Manupatra translates at 20 credits/page, Adalat AI covers the courtroom record itself, and Judicio translates format-preserved at 1 credit/page across all 22 scheduled languages — with certified human translation still required where courts demand it. See AI legal translation across Indian languages.
Due diligence. For a data room, SpotDraft manages the contract lifecycle while an extraction layer — Judicio's Review Matrix (up to 25 questions, 10 answer types, every cell cited) or Harvey's Vault at BigLaw scale — pulls change-of-control, assignment, and exclusivity terms into one grid. See AI for due diligence data rooms.
POSH and IBC compliance. Recurring statutory workflows reward templates over improvisation: Judicio ships POSH documentation and IBC matter templates with deadline-flagged timelines, and Legistify tracks the notices and matters at enterprise volume. Guides: POSH compliance with AI and AI for IBC and insolvency matters.
Quick Verdicts: Which Tool for Which Practice
SCC-invested chambers
Already living in SCC Online? AI Pro (₹51,500/yr + GST) adds grounded AI over the corpus you already trust, with TruePrint verifiability courts respect. Accept that your documents stay outside it.
Manupatra shops
AI Search + Manuworks is the cheapest credible AI entry among incumbents (from ₹6,000/yr) and the only incumbent stack with translation, OCR, and timelines — budget for credit burn at volume.
Precedent-graph researchers
CaseMine gives citator-flagged good-law signals at the entry tier plus US/UK coverage — strong for cross-border case-law work on a freemium budget, thin on workflow.
Enterprise contracts & legal ops
SpotDraft for AI-native CLM, Legistify for litigation-plus-notices operations at PSU scale. Both quote-only; neither is a research tool — pair with a grounded database.
BigLaw with enterprise budget
Harvey or Legora — proven at SAM, AZB, and CAM for transactional and document work, with Indian content via SCC or Manupatra partnerships. Expect sales cycles, seat minimums, and six-figure USD commitments.
Indian + cross-border in one workspace
Judicio — Indian Kanoon plus 100+ jurisdictions, 22 scheduled languages, drafting with tracked changes, side-aware case strategy with moot court, and Organisation-plan collaboration, self-serve from ₹9,999/mo with a 7-day trial.
Is Legal AI Safe Under the DPDP Act?
Client confidentiality is a professional duty; the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 adds a statutory layer that is no longer theoretical. The DPDP Rules, 2025 were notified on 13 November 2025 with a phased rollout: consent-manager registration from November 2026, and the substantive obligations — consent, notice, security safeguards, breach notification — from May 2027, with penalties running up to ₹250 crore per violation once in force. Any tool that ingests client files becomes part of your data-handling story, so put four questions to every vendor before uploading a single brief:
- Does the vendor train its models on your data? It should not — Judicio does not, and several Indian vendors (Lexlegis, VIDUR, Jhana) make the same commitment. Get it in writing.
- Where is data hosted and encrypted, and under what terms? Judicio is hosted on Google Cloud; Lexlegis offers sovereign-cloud and air-gapped options for institutions with mandates.
- Are there role-based access controls and an audit trail so a matter is visible only to the people working on it? Free consumer chatbots fail this test immediately.
- Are the data-processing terms DPDP-aware — clear that you decide the purpose and the vendor processes on your instructions, with breach-notification duties that will bind from May 2027 reflected in the contract?
Legal AI can be used responsibly under the DPDP regime when the vendor handles data conservatively and humans stay in control of decisions. Our DPDP compliance guide covers what to put in writing; whatever tool you pick, confirm the specifics with the vendor rather than assuming them.
How to Choose for an Indian Practice
- Solo advocate or small chamber: start free (Indian Kanoon, Jhana's free tier), then add one paid tool matching your dominant work — Jhana or Manupatra AI Search for research volume, Judicio if drafting, translation, and review matter as much as research. See AI for Indian advocates.
- Research-heavy litigation chambers: an editorial corpus (SCC Online AI Pro or Manupatra) plus a workflow layer; verify every AI citation against the true copy before filing — the advocate carries the misconduct risk.
- Firms with Indian and cross-border matters: one workspace beats two half-maps — the case Judicio is built for; our research-tools comparison applies the same logic globally.
- Enterprise legal departments: CLM (SpotDraft/Legistify) as the system of record, a grounded research tool beside it, and DPDP-aware processing terms in every contract. See AI for Indian law firms.
- Whatever you choose: run the trial on your own brief, your own contract, and your own bench of authorities — and check that every citation opens to a real, current judgment.
Judicio's 7-day free trial (500 credits, Deep Mode included, no card) exists precisely for that test. For the selection framework in full, see how to choose a legal AI platform.
Sources: vendor pricing pages and documentation, firm press releases, court orders and judgments including 2026 INSC 668, PIB releases on eCourts Phase III, and 2025–2026 legal-tech reporting including Artificial Lawyer, Bar & Bench, and LiveLaw, compiled July 2026. Third-party pricing reports are estimates; figures indicative — confirm with vendor. Judicio outputs are not legal advice.