Legal Research

Lex Intell

Est. 2020 Bangladesh Updated 2026-03-19
ai
Unverified by r/legaltech members — this page is based on publicly available information, not hands-on testing or practitioner feedback. Verify your experience with Lex Intell

Bangladesh’s first AI-powered legal research platform. Online database of Bangladeshi case laws, statutes, codes, and gazettes with advanced search capabilities. Also described as providing case management features. Built by Silver Circle Tech Limited / Qtec Solution. HQ: Dhaka, Bangladesh. Founded ~2021. 2 employees, 238 LinkedIn followers. Won Bangladesh round of Global Legal Hackathon. Listed in Asia Law Portal ‘55 Legal Tech Companies in Asia to Follow in 2023.’ Addresses the same jurisdiction gap as YourMunshi (Pakistan) — leading legal AI tools built for US/UK common law don’t cover Bangladeshi law.

Company Info

  • Founded: 2020
  • Team size: 1-10 employees
  • HQ: Germany
  • Sector: Legal Research

What We Haven’t Verified

This page was assembled from publicly available information. Feature claims and workflow mappings are based on what the vendor and third-party listings publish — not hands-on testing or practitioner feedback.

Workflows

Based on practitioner evidence, Lex Intell is used in these workflows:

What practitioners struggle with

Real frustrations from legal professionals — the problems Lex Intell addresses (or should address). Sourced from practitioner reviews, Reddit threads, and case studies.

Legal research costs $400-600/hour in associate time and takes hours of manual digging — searching Westlaw/Lexis, reading irrelevant results, synthesizing case law. Clients increasingly refuse to pay for research hours on invoices. AI can compress a 4-hour research memo into 20 minutes, but most firms have no approved tool

Research & Analysis 134 vendors affected Large firm (51–200) · Mid-size firm (11–50) · In-house counsel · Solo practitioner

Solo/small firm needs case law research but Westlaw and LexisNexis charge $300-500/month per user — either pay and bleed, negotiate a discount every year, or go without and risk missing relevant authority. Free alternatives (Google Scholar, Fastcase) have gaps in coverage and no citator

Research & Analysis 35 vendors affected Solo practitioner · Small firm (2–10) · Mid-size firm (11–50) · Large firm (51–200)

Litigation associate searches for case law supporting a specific legal argument but keyword search returns 500+ results, most irrelevant — the actual proposition ('courts have held that X constitutes Y under Z standard') is buried across dozens of cases that happen to contain the same terms but reach different conclusions

Research & Analysis 18 vendors affected Solo practitioner · Small firm (2–10) · Mid-size firm (11–50) · Large firm (51–200)

European lawyers working in civil law jurisdictions need AI-powered research but every leading tool is built for US/UK common law — the legal reasoning is different, the source hierarchies are different, and the tools don't understand local codes, doctrine, or case law traditions

Research & Analysis 14 vendors affected mid-firm · large-firm · Solo practitioner · small-firm

Where it fits in your workflow

Community Data

Loading practitioner-sourced data…