Ordalie or Harvey: what evidence should you request?
Comparing Ordalie and Harvey for French-law work requires separating stated features, verified sources and commercial terms. Ordalie publishes a plan table on the pages checked; no Harvey price was verified in this review. That difference in visibility does not establish a difference in quality. Use the same fictional case and questions to request demonstrations from both vendors, including the French-law source coverage your work requires.
Source OSource H1Julie by AlphaDeep is an AI legal assistant for French law, built for individuals and professionals, with sourced answers, document and case-file analysis, assisted drafting and team sharing. Compare AI legal assistants for French law.
Which tasks do the vendors describe?
Compare tasks described on their official pages without treating different feature names as equivalent. Source OSource H1Source H2
| Criterion | Ordalie: stated scope | Harvey: stated scope | Common check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Research | Legal research and sources in published plans | Assistant and research functions described by the vendor | Open the French authority supporting each point |
| Documents | Imports and document work depend on the plan | Document and file work described on the platform | Use the same corpus; examine limits and output |
| Team | Plan and offer scope need confirmation | Professional environment and access need confirmation | Demonstrate roles, sharing and traceability |
| Price | Public tiers to read with their limits | Price not established in the inspected pages | Comparable written offer, users and commitment |
Which French-law sources should we verify?
Ask about the corpus, updates and a citation demonstration on the same fictional case.
Which prices are publicly visible?
Ordalie displays plans; Harvey pricing remains unknown in the checked sources. Keep units and commitment with each amount. Source OSource H1
How should we compare document workflows?
Separate import, document search, answers and export. Ask for the limits and conditions at each stage. Source OSource H1Source H2
How can you compare Ordalie and Harvey on the same file?
Use the same question, documents and criterion for both demonstrations. A feature not established by the documentation must remain a verification question.
Fictional example · you can change the fields
Your entries stay on this page until you choose to continue.
Your preparation
One protocol, two outputs to examine
- Identify clauses to check in a French services agreement and open the cited sources.
- Record the authority, passage and date for each source, then check what it supports.
- Document observed limitations without treating them as universal product characteristics.
What happens in the other cases?
- Cited source
- Check that the link opens and supports the precise point, with the correct date and context. A citation alone is insufficient.
- Incomplete documentation
- Turn the unknown into a demo question. Do not substitute “absent” for “not verified”.
- Team choice
- Weight the criteria after a documented demonstration. The table declares no universal winner.
What should we ask about team access?
Describe required roles and permissions, then ask for a demonstration. A workspace name does not establish those permissions. Source H2
Does English output establish French-law coverage?
No. Output language, legal sources and service terms are separate questions.
How do we record unknowns fairly?
Write “to confirm” beside the corresponding question. Missing information is neither a missing feature nor a quality score.
Which case should we use for the demo?
Use a short fictional file with a dated source and one deliberately missing fact; ask for citations, limits and further checks.