Which legal AI tools store client data in Canada?

As of October 2026, Clio (Canadian server option), Thomson Reuters CoCounsel (Canada region-based hosting), Lexis+ AI Canada (Canada or EU), Spellbook (data centres in Canada and the US) and Augure (Canada) publish Canadian storage. Storage is only one of four questions; where the AI inference runs is a separate one, and Clio and CoCounsel publish that part of the request can be processed outside Canada.

Does Clio Duo keep my client data in Canada?

Per Clio's published help documentation, firms can use a Canadian server and Clio Work data, including Vincent AI conversations, is stored at rest in that environment. The same page says generating an AI response may involve temporary processing outside the account's region. Clio does not name the model provider or the processing country on the pages checked.

Is storing data in Canada enough to protect solicitor-client privilege when I use AI?

Storage location is one factor. The Law Society of Ontario's 2024 white paper flags providers that use inputs to train or otherwise store them, and the Barreau du Québec's guide asks for the hosting location, the contractual terms and the data retention clauses. A full picture needs four answers: where data rests, where inference runs, which country's courts can compel the vendor, and whether inputs train models.

Does Harvey offer Canadian data residency?

Not on the pages checked. Harvey's security page lists in-region processing for the EU or Switzerland, the US, and Australia. Its subprocessor list dated September 21, 2026 lists its AI providers in the US, EU, Switzerland and Australia. Canada does not appear on either page.

← Back to Insights

AI for Legal

Which AI Tools for Canadian Law Firms Keep Client Data in Canada? (October 2026)

Q: What does Augure Legal cost and where does it run?

Augure Legal is priced in Canadian dollars from Solo at C$149 per month for 5 contracts to Practice at C$1,499 per month for 100 contracts, with Enterprise custom. Customer data is stored in Canada. Inference runs on Canadian infrastructure and with vetted EU partners under zero-data-retention agreements, and is never routed to providers in the United States. Customer data is never used to train models.

Where Clio, Spellbook, Harvey, CoCounsel, Lexis+ AI, Alexi, Jurisage and Augure say client data is stored and where the AI runs, taken from each vendor's own published pages.

By Augure·October 27, 2026

A view of a tall building with a sky scraper in the background

As of October 27, 2026, two of the nine tools below publish that client content is stored and processed only in Canada or the European Union: Lexis+ AI Canada and Augure. The others publish Canadian storage with AI processing that can leave the country (Clio, Thomson Reuters CoCounsel), Canadian or US storage with no stated inference location (Spellbook), no Canadian region at all (Harvey), or no location at all (Alexi, Jurisage).

Every competitor cell comes from that vendor's own security, privacy, help or pricing page, fetched on October 27, 2026. Nothing here says a tool is or is not compliant with any rule; it reports what each vendor has put in writing. Background in two earlier posts: AI for Canadian law firms: privilege, data residency and what to look for and AI for Canadian law firms: client confidentiality explained.

The comparison

Tool	Vendor country	Where client data is stored (published)	Where AI inference runs (published)	Training on your data	Law Society-relevant notes	Pricing (published)	Best fit
Clio (Clio Duo, Clio Work, Vincent AI)	Canada (Themis Solutions Inc., Burnaby, BC)	US or Canadian server, firm's choice; Clio Work data, including Vincent AI conversations, rests there	Response generation "may involve temporary processing outside your account's region"; provider not named	Client work "never used to train public AI models"	SOC 1 and SOC 2 Type 2 in its Trust Centre; AI Overview on request	From C$69 per user per month	Firms run on Clio that accept out-of-region AI processing
Spellbook	Canada (Dialog Enterprises Inc., "headquartered in Canada")	"data centers in Canada and US", AWS primary; per-tenant region not stated	Not published; OpenAI and Anthropic under zero-data-retention agreements	Not stated on the security page	SOC 2 Type II; cites PIPEDA, GDPR, HIPAA	Not published; per seat, 7-day trial	Word-native drafting; confirm your tenant's region
Harvey	United States (Harvey AI Corporation, San Francisco)	Azure; in-region choice of "EU or Switzerland, US, or Australia"; Canada not listed	AI providers listed in US, EU, Switzerland, Australia (subprocessor list, September 21, 2026); zero retention required	Not by default; opt-in bespoke models only	SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, 27701, 42001	Not published	Large firms with cross-border matters that accept a non-Canadian region
Thomson Reuters CoCounsel Essentials (Canada)	Thomson Reuters (NYSE / TSX: TRI)	US by default; "Region-based hosting is available in the UK, Australia, and Canada"	"We process all interactions with OpenAI GPT and Google Gemini in the U.S."; zero-retention calls	Not used "to train or improve CoCounsel Essentials"	TLS 1.2, AES-256; retention set per customer	Online plans page; amounts not captured on the page checked	Thomson Reuters research customers that accept US inference
Lexis+ AI Canada (Protégé)	LexisNexis, a RELX Group plc business	"processed and stored within Canadian or EU borders" (June 2025)	"processed and stored in Canada and the European Union" (August 2025); providers not named	"never used to train large language models"	SOC 2 Type 2; session data purged within 90 days	Not published	Research-heavy practices on Lexis; clearest published residency of the research platforms
Alexi	Canada and US offices (Alexi Technologies Inc., Toronto and New York)	Not published; privacy policy allows processing "outside of Canada, including in the United States and Ireland"	Not published; "inference-only model usage"	Content never "trains external systems"	SOC 2; AES-256; SaaS and private-environment tiers	Not published	Litigation memos for firms of 11+ lawyers that get a region commitment in contract
Jurisage	Canada (Jurisage Group Inc., Kitchener, ON); "joining Clio"	Not published	Not published	Not published	Privacy policy names no hosting country	Free tier; paid plans not published	Tables of authorities; confirm what changes under Clio
Augure Legal	Canada (Montreal; no US parent or investors)	Canada	Canadian infrastructure and vetted EU partners under zero-data-retention agreements; never routed to US providers	Never	Compliance scoring: PIPEDA, Law 25, CASL, PHIPA, CPCSC, OSFI B-10; TLS 1.3, AES-256	Solo C$149 to Practice C$1,499 per month; Enterprise custom	Contract review with Canadian-law checks, CAD pricing, Quebec French
Augure Chat	Same	Canada	Same; Rosedale One tier on Canadian inference	Never	Document upload, deep research, web search; no training	Free C$0, Pro C$20, Max C$80 per month	General drafting and research assistant; not a case-law database

All competitor statements are per each vendor's published documentation as of October 2026.

What "data in Canada" has to mean for privilege

A vendor that answers "yes, your data is in Canada" has usually answered one of four questions. You need all four.

Storage at rest. The one most vendors publish, and most can satisfy, including Clio and CoCounsel through a Canadian region.

Inference. CoCounsel's Canadian page is unusually direct: hosting can be Canadian while every call to OpenAI GPT and Google Gemini is processed in the US. Clio's help article says it more softly: a response "may involve temporary processing outside your account's region". A Canadian storage region does not move the inference.

Vendor jurisdiction. The company that holds the data and the companies that run the models answer to their own courts. The vendor column lists what each publishes about where it is based. What that means for compelled production is your call, not this post's.

Training. Most vendors in the table now state that inputs are not used to train models. The Law Society of Ontario's April 2024 white paper, Licensee use of generative artificial intelligence, lists this first among its risks: "Some generative AI tool providers may use inputs from users to train their tools or otherwise store or use inputs within their products." It asks licensees to do due diligence "including the terms of service, the product capabilities, its limitations, its data management and security."

The Federation of Law Societies' Model Code, which the provincial codes are harmonized with, says in Rule 3.3-1: "A lawyer at all times must hold in strict confidence all information concerning the business and affairs of a client acquired in the course of the professional relationship." Commentary [4A] under the competence rule adds that a lawyer "should understand the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, recognizing the lawyer's duty to protect confidential information set out in section 3.3."

The Barreau du Québec's guide, L'intelligence artificielle générative : Guide pratique pour une utilisation responsable, is blunt on open tools: simply entering information protected by professional secrecy into an open system, meaning one accessible to the public whose data is not stored internally, "constitue une violation, même sans reproduction ou divulgation effectives". Its vendor checklist asks: "Quels sont les paramètres contractuels, l'emplacement d'hébergement et les clauses relatives à la propriété, à l'usage et à la conservation des données?" A province-by-province reading is in Law Society AI guidance compared: Ontario, Quebec, BC.

Questions to put to a vendor, in writing

In which country and region is our data stored at rest?
In which country is each model call processed, including any fallback or overflow provider?
Which model providers receive our content, and under what retention terms?
Which legal entity holds our data, where is it incorporated, and who is its parent?
Are inputs, outputs or documents used to train or fine-tune any model, yours or a provider's?
What is the retention period for prompts and outputs, and who sets it?
Which parts of these answers are in the contract, and which are only on the website?

Where each category of tool wins

Practice management AI (Clio). The AI sits inside the matter record, the calendar and the billing data, which no standalone tool can see. Clio also publishes CAD pricing and a Canadian server option. If your firm already runs on Clio, the residency question narrows to one item: where the model call runs.

Drafting add-ins (Spellbook). Spellbook lives in Word, where transactional lawyers draft. It names its model providers and its zero-data-retention terms, which several larger vendors do not. The open item is which of its Canadian or US data centres your tenant uses.

Research platforms (CoCounsel, Lexis+ AI, Alexi). These win on content: Thomson Reuters' legal content behind CoCounsel, the Lexis corpus behind Lexis+ AI, Alexi's research memo generation. No contract review tool, Augure included, replaces a primary-law database. Among the three, Lexis+ AI Canada has the clearest published residency statement, and CoCounsel the most candid one about US inference.

Enterprise platforms (Harvey). Harvey publishes the broadest certification set in the table (ISO 27001, 27701, 42001, SOC 2 Type II) and a dated subprocessor list. For a multi-jurisdictional firm that transparency matters. It just does not include a Canadian region.

Free and niche tools (Jurisage). A free table-of-authorities builder is useful on its own terms. Its pending move into Clio means its data handling may change; confirm before relying on it.

Where Augure wins

Augure's position is simpler to describe. It is a Canadian company with no US corporate parent and no US investors. Customer data is stored in Canada. Inference runs on Canadian infrastructure and with vetted EU partners under zero-data-retention agreements, and is never routed to providers in the United States; some model tiers run in Canada, others in the EU, and the privacy policy documents every cross-border flow. Limited US processing exists for payment card networks and email delivery only. Customer data is never used to train models.

Augure Legal does one job: AI contract review for Canadian law, with clause-level green, yellow and red analysis, a playbook builder, redline and review, saved workflows, and compliance scoring across PIPEDA, Quebec Law 25, CASL, PHIPA, CPCSC and OSFI B-10. That scoring supports your compliance work; it does not confer compliance on anyone. It works natively in Quebec French and English. Pricing is in Canadian dollars: Solo C$149 per month for 5 contracts, Partner C$299 for 10, Firm C$499 for 25, Practice C$1,499 for 100, Enterprise custom. The legal solutions page covers firm deployments.

Augure Chat is the general assistant beside it, at Free C$0, Pro C$20 and Max C$80 per month, with the Rosedale One tier on Canadian inference for firms that want that answer to question two.

If you need a case-law database with AI on top, buy a research platform and ask the seven questions. If you need contract review and a drafting assistant with Canadian handling at a price a small firm can budget, that is the gap Augure was built for.

Sources (checked 2026-10-27)

A

About Augure

Augure is a sovereign AI platform for regulated Canadian organizations. Chat, knowledge base, and compliance tools — all running on Canadian infrastructure.

About Augure Products Start Free