Case simulation: see how your arguments hold up before you file

Every experienced litigator knows the feeling: you've built what seems like a strong case, filed it, and then opposing counsel comes back with an argument you didn't anticipate. Or the judge focuses on a procedural point you'd glossed over.

What if you could stress-test your case before that happens?

What case simulation does

Upload your case materials to Andri as normal. Then switch to simulation mode. The system creates three agents—one arguing your position, one arguing against it, and one evaluating both as a judge would.

Each agent has access to the same legal databases Andri uses for research: case law, statutes, procedural rules. They don't make things up. They find actual law to support (or attack) your position.

The simulation runs through the case: opening arguments, responses, judicial questions, final positions. At the end, you get a transcript showing where your arguments are strong, where they're weak, and what the opposing side might throw at you.

Why this matters

Find weaknesses before your opponent does. The defence agent actively looks for holes in your case—the same holes a competent opposing counsel would find. Better to discover them in simulation than in court.

Discover relevant law you missed. The agents search independently. The defence agent might find a case that undermines your position. That's valuable information—you want to know about it before the other side cites it.

Test different strategies. Run the simulation with different arguments. See which ones hold up better. Refine before you commit.

Explain risks to clients. Show a client the simulation output. "Here's what we're arguing, here's what they'll likely argue back, here's how a judge might see it." Much more concrete than "there are risks."

How it actually works

The simulation follows real procedural structure. For a civil claim in England & Wales, that means:

1. Claimant sets out particulars of claim with supporting authorities
2. Defendant responds with defence and any counterclaim
3. Judge evaluates strength of positions, identifies issues, asks questions
4. Parties respond to judicial concerns
5. Judge provides preliminary assessment

Each agent reasons from the case materials you've uploaded, the legal framework for your jurisdiction, and the precedents it finds through search. Citations are real. Arguments are grounded in actual law.

What it's not

This isn't a crystal ball. Courts are unpredictable. Judges have different views. Facts emerge during litigation that change everything.

What simulation gives you is a structured way to think through how a case might develop, grounded in actual legal sources rather than gut feel.

Who's using it

We've been testing with firms handling:

• Commercial contract disputes
• Employment claims
• Regulatory enforcement matters
• Consumer protection cases

The common thread: matters where understanding the opposing position early saves significant time and cost later.

Available now

Case simulation is included for all Andri users—no extra charge. Try it on a matter where you want to see how strong your position really is.