AI-Powered UK Legal Intelligence

The Modern Standard for UK Legal Research

Full-text search across 1,683 UK appellate judgments, AI-generated summaries, and a professional research workspace — built for the way modern lawyers work.

No Ad Tracking TLS Encrypted OSCOLA Citations
judisyn.uk/research Demo
UKSC2019–2021Landmark
[2019] UKSC 41
R (Miller) v The Prime Minister
UK Supreme Court · Constitutional · 24 Sep 2019
[2021] UKSC 8
Royal Mencap Society v Tomlinson-Blake
UK Supreme Court · Employment · 19 Mar 2021
AI: Ratio decidendi extracted · 3 related authorities found
<1sSearch response
OSCOLACitation ready
Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Court of Appeal (Civil Division) Supreme Court of the United Kingdom Judicial Committee of the Privy Council Court of Appeal (Civil Division)

Trusted by legal professionals across the United Kingdom

Magic Circle Firms Leading Chambers In-House Teams Law Schools Government Legal Sole Practitioners Legal Aid Firms Corporate Counsel Magic Circle Firms Leading Chambers In-House Teams Law Schools Government Legal Sole Practitioners Legal Aid Firms Corporate Counsel
1,683
Judgments
Full text, sourced from Find Case Law
3
Courts Covered
3 courts currently in the database
2009
Earliest Judgment
Coverage begins with the Supreme Court
196
UK Acts
Legislation from legislation.gov.uk
Platform

One workspace for the entire research lifecycle

From discovery to citation export — every tool a modern lawyer needs, in a single refined interface.

Explore all features
Full text Faceted Citation lookup

Search the way you think

Search the full text of every judgment we hold in plain English, or jump straight to a neutral citation. Filters narrow results by court and date.

UKSC Rukhadze v Recovery Partners GP Ltd [2025] UKSC 10
UKSC Costa v Saxon Woods Investments Ltd [2026] UKSC 21
Summaries Ratio Q&A

AI that understands legal context

Generate professional summaries, extract ratio decidendi, identify facts and issues, and ask targeted questions — grounded in the full judgment text.

Summary: The Supreme Court held that the Prime Minister's advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful because it frustrated constitutional principles.

Ratio: Courts may review prerogative powers where they undermine the ability of Parliament to carry out its constitutional functions.

Typography Navigation Highlights

A reader worthy of the law

Clean typography, paragraph-level navigation, inline citations, and persistent AI sidebar — designed for hours of focused reading.

Judgment · [2019] UKSC 41

[1] This appeal concerns the lawfulness of the Prime Minister's decision to advise Her Majesty to prorogue Parliament...

[2] The issue is whether the courts can review the exercise of the prerogative power to prorogue...

Bookmarks Export OSCOLA

Organise, annotate, export

Build research collections, add case notes, sync bookmarks across devices, and export to PDF, Word, or OSCOLA-ready citations.

Miller v PM — Constitutional 3 cases
Mencap — Employment 3 cases
Donoghue — Tort principles 3 cases
Capabilities

Enterprise-grade legal intelligence

The depth of a traditional law library with the speed and intelligence of modern technology.

Advanced Legal Search

Natural language, citation lookup, and party search across the full text of every judgment we hold.

Natural Language Boolean Citation Judge Court Legislation
Citation Networks

Visualise authority relationships, treatment analysis, and overruled cases.

Faceted Filters

Refine by court, date range, area of law, judge, and citation treatment.

Export & Citations

PDF, Word, and OSCOLA-ready citations in one click.

Straight answers about your data

Encrypted in transit, role-based access, and no analytics or advertising trackers anywhere on the site. Our privacy policy names every sub-processor, says where your data is stored, and sets out exactly what the AI features send to OpenAI.

A self-hosted AI model is available for sensitive matters, so prompts never leave our infrastructure.

No Trackers TLS in Transit Local AI Option
How It Works

From question to insight in minutes

Sign in securely

Reach your dashboard and saved collections over an encrypted connection.

Learn more
Search & filter

Natural language or advanced Boolean search with court and date filters.

Learn more
Read & analyse

Open cases in the professional reader with AI summaries alongside.

Learn more
Save & export

Bookmark, annotate, and export OSCOLA citations for your matter.

Learn more
Why Judisyn

Built for lawyers who expect more

Legacy platforms were designed decades ago. Judisyn pairs 1,683 full-text appellate judgments with AI, modern UX, and transparent pricing — and tells you plainly what it does not yet hold.

Read our story
Capability Legacy Judisyn
Natural language search Limited
AI summaries & Q&A Add-on / None
Modern responsive UI
Published coverage figures
OSCOLA citation export
Transparent pricing
Coverage

Courts in the database

1,683 full-text judgments from 3 courts, ingested from the National Archives Find Case Law service. We are adding further courts and tribunals as we extend our ingestion.

Supreme Court of the United Kingdom · 953
Judicial Committee of the Privy Council · 706
Court of Appeal (Civil Division) · 24
Case Library

Landmark UK judgments

View all cases
EWCA CIV Sign in
[2026] EWCA Civ 902
[2026] EWCA Civ 902
EWCA CIV Sign in
[2026] EWCA Civ 914
Rory Lyndon Nash, R v Brighton County Court
UKSC Sign in
[2026] UKSC 20
McCafferty and others v R
UKSC Sign in
[2026] UKSC 21
Francesco Costa v Saxon Woods Investments Limited and others
EWCA CIV Sign in
[2026] EWCA Civ 889
Geeks Limited v Joseph Henry Watts
EWCA CIV Sign in
[2026] EWCA Civ 874
Illiquidx Limited v Altana Wealth & Ors
Artificial Intelligence

Your AI research associate

Fifteen AI tools built for legal work — summaries, headnotes, ratio extraction, plain English explanations, and contextual Q&A on every case.

Generate SummaryProfessional overview in seconds
Extract RatioCore legal principles identified
Legal Q&AAsk questions about any judgment
Find Similar CasesDiscover related authorities
Explore AI features
Judisyn AI
Analysing [2019] UKSC 41 · R (Miller) v The Prime Minister
Example

Summary: The Supreme Court held that the Prime Minister's advice to prorogue Parliament was unlawful.

Ratio: Courts may review the exercise of prerogative powers where constitutional principles are frustrated.

Similar: R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union [2017] UKSC 5

Illustrative example. AI output is generated from the full text of the cited judgment and should always be checked against the original report.

Testimonials

Trusted by professionals

Read all reviews
★★★★★

"Judisyn has transformed how I prepare for hearings. The AI summaries alone save me hours every week."

AA
Adil Aziz
Barrister
★★★★★

"The natural language search is remarkable — we find relevant authorities in seconds, not hours."

AX
ABC XYZ
Partner
★★★★★

"My students finally have access to a research tool that matches the quality of their education."

AX
ABC XYZ
Professor of Law

Ready to research smarter?

Create your account and access the UK's most advanced legal research platform.