Wexler Announces $1.4 Million Pre-Seed Financing, Global Law Firm Adoption and Launch of AI Agent to Enhance Dispute Resolution

By Harry Moran |

Wexler AI, the AI-powered legal fact intelligence platform, today announced major enhancements driving adoption among leading law firms, including Burges Salmon and a top AmLaw100 firm. Clifford Chance is also exploring the platform for use in its world-leading litigation and dispute resolution practice. Wexler’s platform automates essential fact-checking and intelligence gathering in high-stakes legal disputes, allowing lawyers to focus on more complex and strategic value-driven activities. These advancements follow a $1.4M pre-seed funding round led by Myriad Venture Partners, with support from Entrepreneur First, prominent angel investors at ComplyAdvantage, Moonpig, Tractable, and CreditKudos, fueling Wexler’s growth and mission to redefine litigation worldwide.

Since its launch in April of this year, Wexler AI has processed over one million queries, achieved approximately 2X month-over-month growth, and more than tripled its annual recurring revenue (ARR). Wexler’s advanced platform enables law firms to help manage large caseloads with greater accuracy, reallocating resources from time-intensive manual review to high-value legal strategy. Built by security and privacy experts, the platform uses user-specific encryption keys, masks personal data, and meets ISO 27001, GDPR, and AWS Cloud Security standards.

“Wexler assists lawyers working on the world’s most complex cases. The platform delivers critical, verified facts that legal teams can act on with full confidence,” said Gregory Mostyn, co-founder and CEO of Wexler AI. “With support from Myriad Venture Partners, and Entrepreneur First, and working closely with Burges Salmon and also Clifford Chance, among others, we’re not just transforming how the legal industry tackles the time and efficiencies of fact-finding, but helping our customers generate greater business value for their clients.”

There is significant potential to improve efficiencies in the litigation document review process. Wexler’s AI approach reduces manual work, minimizes risk, and uncovers critical facts faster. Unlike traditional eDiscovery tools that merely organize documents, Wexler is purpose-built for high-stakes dispute resolution, delivering insights with an accuracy matching seasoned litigators.

Central to this is KiM, Wexler’s advanced agent for complex dispute tasks, which produces verified work output directly from case facts, automating steps like drafting, generating court applications, and extracting data from vast document sets. More than a passive tool, Wexler uncovers red flags, suggests follow-ups, and enhances case strategy as an active partner, enabling legal teams to drive efficiency and deliver results on the most challenging cases.

“Wexler is a powerful AI tool that is clearly designed for the types and volumes of work faced in dispute resolution,” said Tom Whittaker, director at Burges Salmon. “It allows us to identify relevant facts and produce useful work in a relatively short time, augmenting the work of our expert teams by providing them with additional methods to achieve their objectives. It has been a pleasure to work with the Wexler team over a number of years to continually improve its functionality to help meet our clients’ and colleagues’ high expectations.

With new funding from Myriad, Wexler is expanding its platform in 2025 including new features such as automated document drafting, advanced fact-checking tools, and streamlined discovery requests. These enhancements will extend Wexler’s impact beyond the legal sector, offering new applications in compliance and HR investigations.

“Wexler AI is redefining fact-finding for legal and investigative work, and we see enormous potential in its unique approach,” said Chris Fisher, founder and managing partner of Myriad Venture Partners. “Their rapid growth and ability to deliver verified, actionable information are transforming how legal teams and other professionals manage complex data. We’re excited to support Wexler’s journey and look forward to their continued momentum and innovation.”

Wexler’s founding team blends deep expertise in AI, law, and business. Gregory Mostyn and Kush Madlani met at Entrepreneur First, united by a vision of creating a category defining applied AI company. Gregory saw the inefficiencies of litigation firsthand when his barrister, then judge father, returned from work with binders piled high to the roof of his office. Kush, a former JP Morgan derivatives trader, began automating workflows with Python before completing a Machine Learning Master’s at UCL and joining Tractable, where he developed fraud-detection models and continuous improvement systems. Kush’s scientific background pairs perfectly with Gregory’s commercial experience as a marketing and sales director to transform dispute resolution. 

Wexler AI collaborates with partners across the legal sector, from AM 100 law firms to in-house teams at major enterprises. Interested clients can request a demo at https://www.wexler.ai/.

About Wexler AI

Wexler AI tackles the world’s most complex cases by streamlining fact analysis for legal, compliance, eDiscovery, tax, and forensics teams. Trusted by top global law firms, Wexler is redefining fact-finding through a combination of AI and human expertise. For more information, visit https://www.wexler.ai/.

About Myriad Venture Partners

Myriad Venture Partners is an early-stage venture firm defining the future of business solutions. Investing in visionary AI, clean technology, and B2B software leaders, Myriad brings decades of expertise and a robust corporate and financial partnership network. By connecting entrepreneurs, corporate partners, industry leaders, and co-investors, Myriad is changing the ways businesses operate, compete, and create value.

Commercial

View All

LCM Funding Antitrust Claim Against Microsoft Over Cloud Computing Fees

By Harry Moran |

Among the global tech giants facing the most scrutiny from regulatory bodies, Microsoft has increasingly come under the spotlight in both Europe and America for potential breaches of antitrust rules by its cloud computing business. A lawsuit filed today suggests that these external pressures may be ramping up, as a £1 billion claim is targeting the company for allegedly overcharging its UK customers.

Reporting by TechCrunch covers the news that a new antitrust lawsuit has been filed against Microsoft, which alleges that the company has been overcharging customers of its cloud computing competitors to license Windows Server software. The claim, which was filed today in the Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT), is being brought on an opt-out basis, representing any companies or organisations who purchased a license to use Windows Server from either AWS, GCP or Alibaba Cloud from December 2018. The lawsuit is seeking around £1 billion in compensation with Litigation Capital Management (LCM) providing funding through its British office, LCM Funding UK Limited.

Dr. Maria Luisa Stasi, the Proposed Class Representative (PCR), said that the claim “aims to challenge Microsoft’s anti-competitive behaviour, push them to reveal exactly how much businesses in the UK have been illegally penalised, and return the money to organisations that have been unfairly overcharged.” Dr Stasi has instructed Scott+Scott UK LLP as solicitors for the litigation, with the law firm working with barristers from Brick Court Chambers and One Essex Court Chambers. 

In a separate post, Exton Advisors announced that it had advised Dr Stasi on securing third-party funding from LCM, with Managing Director John Astill stating: “This is another example of holding large corporates to account and ensuring fair entry to consumer markets by smaller players. Competition laws exist to protect both individuals and companies, and it is only with the benefit of third-party funding that these claims can ultimately succeed. Exton Advisors are delighted to play our part in ensuring claims like these are funded in a timely, efficient, and transparent manner.”

James Hain-Cole, partner at Scott+Scott, said: “Litigation Funding Agreements have changed a lot since the collective action regime was implemented and it was helpful to obtain advice on market standard from Exton, who have seen a lot of LFAs and have great visibility of the funding market.”

More information about the lawsuit can be found on the UK Cloud Licensing Claim website.

Victoria Supreme Court Approves $271.8M Settlement in Uber Class Action

By Harry Moran |

Australia continues to be a lucrative jurisdiction for the funding of high-value class actions, as demonstrated this week by the approval of a $271.8 million settlement which will see the litigation funder receive 30 percent of the total sum.

Yesterday, the Trial Division of the Supreme Court of Victoria delivered its judgment in the case of Andrianakis v Uber Technologies Inc and Others, approving a $271.8 million settlement to end the group proceedings against the ride-sharing company. The proceedings, which were first brought by Maurice Blackburn in 2019, alleged that the group members had suffered losses and damage due to Uber ride-sharing services operating contrary to regulations between 2014 and 2017. The group proceedings received third-party litigation funding from Harbour Fund III, L.P.

The Court approved the settlement agreement, finding that it was ‘fair and reasonable and in the interests of group members’, with Uber paying the $271.8 million without admission of liability. In its judgment, the Court also ordered the following deductions from the overall settlement sum: $38.7 million to Maurice Blackburn for legal costs and disbursements, $81.5 million to Harbour as its funding commission, and a total of $220,000 to the plaintiffs and sample group members, as compensation for the work undertaken by them in the proceedings.

In her written judgment, Justice Patricia Matthews addressed the scale of the funder’s commission and acknowledged that whilst the 30 percent proportion is ‘toward the higher end of such commissions’, she emphasised that it is ‘reasonable in the context of such complex litigation with a risk profile quite distinct from, for example, a shareholder class action.’ Justice Matthews also highlighted the crucial role Harbour had played in ensuring that these proceedings were even viable in the first place, declaring that ‘without the involvement of Harbour, there may not have been any compensation available for group members at all.’

The full settlement approval order can be read here.

Pogust Goodhead Looks to Cut Staff Numbers

By Harry Moran |

Whilst large group claims can attract headlines with staggeringly large amounts of compensation, for the law firms who specialise in such cases, the costs of running these claims take a heavy toll given the prolonged case durations.

Reporting by The Law Society Gazette reveals that Pogust Goodhead is undertaking staff cuts potentially resulting in around 40 to 50 job losses in its London office, with employees being let go from both business operations and legal departments. These cuts represent a 20% staff reduction, with the Gazette reporting that the law firm was also exploring letting go around 100 employees in Brazil, with most of these working as call centre staff.

Analysing the reasons behind these staff cuts, the article notes that despite being well-known for its high-value class action claims, Pogust Goodhead does not see consistent income from these lawsuits whilst they are ongoing. As a result, the law firm is reliant on capital provided by outside litigation funding, such as the landmark £450 million investment partnership with Gramercy Funds Management.

A spokesperson from Pogust Goodhead provided the following comment to the Gazette: “We were established with the ambitious goal of providing justice for millions of people who have been wronged by multinational companies. It is well known these companies have infinite resources. While it is an incredibly difficult decision, it is only right that as we move forward, we position our firm strongly to provide access to justice for clients, both, existing and those in the future. We will be running a formal consultation with staff through a staff representative group over the coming weeks before finalising how many people will be affected.”