Back to work
Case Study · AI Product · Legaltech

JUDIC AI

Designing AI-powered judicial experiences that improve access to justice, reducing courtroom documentation burden so judges and court staff can focus on what matters most.

My Role
Lead Product Designer
Duration
3 months
Scope
Platform · Website · Admin
Status
Live · judicai.io
JUDIC AI registrar dashboard: case management system

Augmenting judicial expertise through AI

JUDIC AI is a legal intelligence platform designed to simplify courtroom documentation, reduce administrative burden, and improve the efficiency of judicial workflows through artificial intelligence. The platform supports judges, court staff, and legal professionals with tools for court recording, AI-powered transcription, case management, cause list administration, and virtual hearing experiences.

Over three months, I served as Lead Product Designer, leading the design of the platform's end-to-end experiences while collaborating closely with legal stakeholders and technical teams.

The objective was not to replace judicial expertise. It was to augment it, reducing time spent on documentation so judicial officers could dedicate more attention to decision-making and case outcomes.
JUDIC AI marketing website: JusticeTech event and AI transcription hero

Manual processes in high-stakes environments

Court proceedings generate large amounts of critical information that must be accurately documented, organised, and retrieved. Traditional courtroom documentation is often manual, time-consuming, and resource-intensive, leaving judicial professionals managing administrative tasks that could otherwise be directed toward judicial responsibilities.

📝

Documentation burden

Reducing manual courtroom documentation while maintaining the accuracy and integrity that legal records demand was the central design tension.

🤖

Introducing AI with trust

AI had to be introduced into legal workflows in a way that felt trustworthy, supporting confidence rather than creating uncertainty in consequential environments.

👥

Varying digital literacy

Judicial systems involve users with different levels of comfort with technology. The platform had to work confidently for all of them, regardless of technical proficiency.

⚙️

No disruption to process

Increasing efficiency without disrupting established court procedures. The design had to feel like a natural extension of how courts already operate.

JUDIC AI overview dashboard: case distribution analytics and login screen

End-to-end judicial experiences

JUDIC AI extended across several interconnected judicial experiences: from first impression through to administrative oversight. Each area was designed to reduce friction at a specific point in the judicial workflow.

1

Marketing website

Communicating the value of AI-assisted judicial workflows to legal institutions and stakeholders, establishing credibility and relevance before any platform interaction.

2

Judge dashboard & court proceeding recorder

Providing judges with visibility into proceedings, documentation, and relevant activities, alongside tools to accurately capture courtroom proceedings in real time.

3

AI transcription experience

Transforming spoken courtroom interactions into structured documentation, reducing reliance on manual note-taking while maintaining the accuracy and integrity that legal records require. This was one of the most demanding and rewarding design challenges in the platform.

4

Case management & cause list

Helping legal professionals organise and track cases more effectively, with scheduling and visibility into upcoming hearings through a cause list management experience designed for court administrators.

5

Virtual hearings, export, notifications & admin

Enabling remote participation in judicial processes, mechanisms for sharing and preserving legal records, timely stakeholder notifications, user management, and administrative experiences for operational visibility and oversight.

JUDIC AI registrar dashboard with notifications panel: case status updates and hearing alerts

Where accuracy and trust had to coexist

Among all the components of JUDIC AI, the AI transcription experience represented one of the most consequential design challenges. Courtroom proceedings are high-stakes environments where accuracy is non-negotiable.

JUDIC AI transcript editor: speaker labels, edit mode, and progress tracker
"Artificial intelligence should not compete with human expertise. It should amplify it."

The transcription experience had to balance speed, clarity, trust, ease of review, and confidence in generated outputs. Court personnel needed to document proceedings more efficiently while maintaining full confidence in the integrity of the records produced.

This shaped decisions around how AI output was presented, distinguishing captured speech from AI-structured summaries, making review and correction flows straightforward, and ensuring that the system's status was always visible. Designing for low technical literacy meant familiar patterns, clear information hierarchy, and error prevention at every step.

How research shaped the design

Before any interface work began, I conducted structured interviews with three judicial officers and two court registrars to understand how they currently managed documentation, where errors were most likely, and what "efficient" looked like from their perspective, not ours.

Three findings directly changed the design direction:

1

AI confidence had to be visible, not implied

Judges didn't distrust AI. They distrusted AI that didn't show its reasoning. Early concepts showed AI transcription output as clean, finished text. After research, we added confidence indicators and inline correction prompts. Users reported feeling "in control" of the AI output, not dependent on it.

2

Role separation was more important than feature richness

An early brief described one unified platform with all features accessible to all users. Research showed this was wrong. A registrar's priority is the cause list; a judge's is the case record; a stenographer's is live transcription control. We restructured the IA around roles, not features, before writing a single screen.

3

Usability testing caught critical flow errors before build

A moderated usability test with two legal practitioners on mid-fidelity prototypes revealed that the hearing scheduling flow required 9 steps when practitioners expected 3. We simplified to a two-screen flow before handoff. Post-launch, this translated to the 3× faster task completion measured in follow-up testing with practitioners.

"The research told us what the brief hadn't: that legal professionals don't fear AI. They fear AI that doesn't tell them when it's unsure."
JUDIC AI virtual hearing session: two-participant court proceeding with session controls

Impact

Livejudicai.io
12+Areas designed
3moEngagement
FullEnd-to-end UX

The platform contributed to reduced courtroom documentation time, increased operational efficiency, and reduced administrative burden on judicial personnel, with positive stakeholder feedback from legal professionals and court staff throughout the engagement.

By reducing time spent on documentation, JUDIC AI helped judicial officers dedicate more attention to decision-making and case outcomes, contributing to a broader goal of improving access to justice through thoughtfully designed technology.

What this project reinforced

JUDIC AI reinforced an important lesson about designing AI experiences within high-stakes environments. Artificial intelligence should not compete with human expertise. It should amplify it.

The role of design is to bridge the gap between sophisticated technologies and the people who depend on them. Success required understanding legal processes deeply, respecting established practices, and introducing innovation in ways that improved confidence rather than created uncertainty.

This project strengthened my ability to design human-centred AI experiences that support critical work without compromising trust or usability.

Biggest lesson: In AI product design, the most important design surface isn't the interface. It's the way the system communicates its own limitations. In legal environments especially, visible uncertainty builds trust. Invisible uncertainty destroys it.