Last month (in March 2026), Legora’s Practice Lead for International Arbitration described a future in which AI could assist lawyers during live hearings. He imagined AI listening to testimony, checking it against the case file and flagging contradictions as the hearing progressed. “Having that in real time would be a tremendous change” he said.
For lawyers using Wexler, this has been technologically possible since May 2025. ‘RealTime’ enables Wexler users to ‘fact-check’ testimony live against the underlying exhibits, flagging any inconsistencies within seconds.
When it comes to complex disputes, general legal AI often comes up short. Whilst these platforms improve research, drafting, and review work for lawyers, disputes are decided by how well lawyers can assimilate the facts into a cohesive case; general legal AI tools were not built with that in mind.
Disputes turn on factual control
Complex disputes tend to go wrong when the factual record emerges too late: a chronology changes, a contradiction appears, a witness account evolves, or the case theory rests on assumptions which were never tested.
Large and complex matters often involve years of communications, multiple custodians, and fragmented timelines. Managing that problem solely with human review is only getting harder as more data is created. In addition, commercial litigation activity rose significantly across the High Court in 2025, with data showing claim volumes at their highest levels since before the pandemic and a shift toward larger, more complex disputes. (The Solomonic Year in Review 2025: Commercial Litigation Trends).
Although general legal AI platforms assist lawyers with answering questions, drafting documents and summarising material at speed, the specific workflows in disputes mean that litigators need something more exacting.
A litigation team can review contracts quickly and still be uncertain about what the contemporaneous evidence (Teams messages, emails, Whatsapps) really shows. They can produce more, high quality work and still discover too late that a key assumption does not hold because of a missing fact.
Read more: You don’t need documents. You need facts.
Disputes need structure
A platform built for general legal productivity starts with the task. A platform built for disputes starts with the dispute and supports the lawyer through different tasks. One improves how work is produced, the other improves how cases are understood.
A litigation team needs a factual record it can interrogate throughout the life of the matter. It needs events linked to underlying source material, contradictions exposed early, timelines that remain stable and update as new evidence arrives, and factual claims that can be tested against the record, continuously, as the matter develops. In some cases, that now extends into live hearings, where RealTime verification becomes possible. Wexler can do all of that.
This changes how cases are run. Partners reach strategic conclusions earlier and clients receive advice based on more conclusive evidence.
Read our white paper A matter of facts: Fact Intelligence in modern litigation.
Why general tools aren’t enough
The legal market spent the last two years asking which (if any) platform would serve the whole firm. Firms wanted scale, consistency and a quick path to adoption.
Most firms have now realised there is a better question to ask: which tools will support and accelerate performance in the most complex practice areas.
Much of the cost and risk in disputes comes from discovering too late what should have been known sooner. Structured factual analysis reduces that delay.
General legal AI platforms will remain useful, but they do not resolve the central problem in disputes, which is factual mastery under conditions of uncertainty and scale.
Wexler was built for disputes. It analyses every fact in every document to show what the evidence actually supports. That helps lawyers organise the record, trace assertions back to source material and identify contradictions earlier. It expands what lawyers know about the case and accelerates–rather than replaces–their mastery of the matter.
Read more: The next phase of AI in arbitration is structuring the record
Over the coming weeks, we will publish a series on how lawyers are using AI built for litigation: maintaining continuously verified chronologies, identifying contradictions across large document sets earlier, testing factual assumptions before they shape strategy, and using RealTime verification of testimony during trial preparation and hearings.
In disputes, the advantage comes from knowing more about the case, earlier, and with greater certainty–which is what Wexler was designed to do.