Features

Everything RAD does.

The full feature tour. Mobile, lightweight, deep when you need it.

Chat

Talk to any case, statute, or judgment.

Upload a PDF and ask whatever you need: "What's the ratio decidendi? How does this compare to Oakes? Quiz me on the dissent." RAD answers in plain language and points you to the exact paragraph it pulled from.

  • Attach multiple documents to one conversation
  • Streaming answers in real time
  • Ask about any article — RAD pulls it from the Civil Code, Criminal Code, or Charter mid-chat
  • Drop in a screenshot of your prof's slides — RAD reads them too
  • Save threads, rename them, come back when exam season hits
Constitutional Law — Week 8
Compare the s. 7 analysis here with R v. Morgentaler.
Reading Oakes (p. 1–28)…Article consulted: s. 7, Charter of Rights and Freedoms

Both cases use the principles of fundamental justice as the s. 7 anchor — but Morgentaler treats them as procedural (access to abortion review), while Oakes is decided on s. 1 grounds rather than s. 7. Key contrast: Oakes establishes the proportionality test you'll apply to almost every Charter limit going forward.

Oakes, p. 12 ¶ 24Charter, s. 7
Ask a follow-up…
Inline tools

AI that lives inside the document.

Highlight any passage. Four tools surface instantly. No tab-switching. No copy-paste. Just select and ask.

Hodgkinson v. Simms · 1994

A breach of fiduciary duty arises where one party stands in a position of trust and confidence such that the law imposes an obligation of loyalty and good faith.

SummaryLegal termsExplainReformulate
Explain

Some relationships (like lawyer–client or doctor–patient) put one person in charge of another's interests. The law says: don't betray that trust. If you do, you've breached your fiduciary duty.

Summary

The gist of the passage in 30 seconds.

Legal terms

Every concept defined inline — actus reus to volenti.

Explain

Rewrites the passage with everyday analogies your professor would never use.

Reformulate

Untangles a sentence so it actually makes sense the first time.

Art. 1457Civil Code of Québec
Art. 1457
Civil Code of Québec
Scenario available

Every person has a duty to abide by the rules of conduct incumbent on him, according to the circumstances, usage or law, so as not to cause injury to another. Where he is endowed with reason and fails in this duty, he is liable for any injury he causes to another by such fault…

faute, dommage, lien causal
My note

Foundation article for civil liability — three elements: fault, damage, causation. Cf. art. 1458 for contractual.

Legislation

Every code. Every article. One click away.

Type an article number. Get the text, scenarios that bring it to life, and AI examples that show how it actually applies. Annotate any article with your own notes — color-coded, saved across sessions, ready for the exam.

Civil Code of QuebecCriminal CodeCharter of Rights and Freedoms+ federal & provincial statutes
  • Search by article number or keyword
  • Scenarios for every article of the Civil Code
  • Highlight, note, color-code — Pro
  • Cross-link articles to your own documents
Exam prep · Pro

Turn any reading into an exam.

Upload your week's readings, then click Generate cue cards or Generate practice exam. RAD pulls questions from the actual content you're being tested on — not generic flashcards from the internet.

Cue cards

12 / 24

Flippable cards generated from your documents. Shuffle, restart, master the material.

Mock exam

Q 7 / 10

Multiple-choice exams scored on the spot with a 'study weak areas' button.

Under s. 1 of the Charter, who carries the burden of justifying a rights infringement?

  • The party challenging the law
  • The Crown / state
  • Either party, depending on the right
  • The Supreme Court ex officio
Score: 7/10Study weak areas
Bulk actions · Pro

Process your entire reading list at once.

Drop in twelve cases. Get twelve case briefs in under a minute. Or twelve sets of comprehension questions. Or twelve plain-English summaries. The hours you used to spend prepping just got compressed into a coffee break.

Quick actions

Summarize, define legal terms, explain, or reformulate — across many documents.

Case analysis

Extract the facts, issues, parties, and ratio of every case in one click.

Test your understanding

Generate Q&A for every document so you can quiz yourself across the whole syllabus.

Step 3 of 3 · ResultsProcessing 4 of 5
  • Oakes — case briefDone
  • Morgentaler — case briefDone
  • Hunter v. Southam — case briefDone
  • Big M Drug Mart — case briefDone
  • Edwards Books — case briefProcessing
Built for Canadian law school

Why students trust RAD.

Every answer cites.

Article numbers, paragraph anchors, click-to-jump. No hallucinated case names, no made-up paragraphs. If RAD says it, RAD shows you where.

Bilingual & bi-juridical.

Common law and droit civil. EN and FR. The only AI study tool built from the ground up for Canadian law school — not retrofitted.

Hosted in Canada.

Your readings stay in Canadian data centres. Sovereign, not sent to American servers, encrypted at rest.

This semester, study smarter.

Free to start. No credit card. Two thousand law students can't be wrong.

Get started — it's free