OneLaw vs LEAP: a NZ law firm comparison

OneLaw and LEAP are the two systems that come up most often when NZ law firms evaluate practice management software. On paper they look similar: both are cloud-based, both handle trust accounting and Xero integration, both cover time recording and matter management. But they were built for different things, and that shows up once you get past the demo. This OneLaw vs LEAP comparison covers the differences that actually matter for a NZ law firm.

Why these two systems keep coming up

OneLaw is established with a solid share of the NZ market. LEAP, which acquired Infinitylaw, has been actively selling to existing Infinitylaw customers as that system approaches end of life. That commercial push has put LEAP in front of a lot of NZ law firms at once, which is a big part of why these two end up in the same evaluation so often. For firms currently on Infinitylaw, understanding your migration options before you start vendor conversations will save time later.

Trust accounting: the most important factor for most NZ firms

If your firm manages a trust account, this is where you need to focus first.

OneLaw's trust accounting was built for the NZ market from the start. TAS certificate generation, IBD handling under s114, and three-way reconciliation are native workflows, developed with NZLS auditor input. The system was designed around what NZ trust account supervisors actually need to do every month.

LEAP's trust accounting was designed for Australian regulatory requirements and adapted for NZ. The practical result is that the NZ-specific workflows feel bolted on rather than native. For a trust account supervisor used to a purpose-built NZ system, LEAP's approach to TAS certificates, reconciliation, and IBD can be cumbersome. The underlying data is there, but the day-to-day experience reflects a system that was built for a different market first.

Trust accounting is one of the highest-risk areas in a law firm's operations, and getting it wrong has real consequences for NZLS inspections. OneLaw's advantage here is structural.

Beyond the current feature set, there is a longer-term consideration. OneLaw only serves the NZ market. When NZLS changes requirements, OneLaw's entire commercial interest is in meeting them quickly. LEAP serves the Australian and US markets as well, which means NZ regulatory changes compete with the priorities of much larger customer bases. Worth factoring into any evaluation, even if it does not rule LEAP out.

Both products integrate with Xero for the General Ledger. Leap can also integrate with MYOB.

Document automation

This is where LEAP has the clearest advantage.

LEAP ships with a large, maintained library of NZ precedents. When you open a matter, client and matter data you have already entered auto-populates into documents without re-keying. The library covers conveyancing, property, and other common practice areas, and LEAP maintains it centrally as legislation and forms change. LEAP also integrates with By Lawyers, which adds a deeper layer of NZ precedents, commentaries, and step-by-step matter plans. Firms can add their own documents using LEAP's Document Customisation Engine.

OneLaw provides capable document assembly tools and integrates with Word and Outlook, but does not ship with a comparable ready-made library. Firms on OneLaw build their own precedent library over time. That can be a strength for firms that want full control over their templates, but it takes time and expertise to set up well, and the productivity gains arrive later.

For high-volume conveyancing practices or any firm doing document-intensive work, LEAP's out-of-the-box automation is a genuine operational advantage.

Time recording

LEAP includes automatic time capture. The system monitors activity across documents, emails, and matters and logs billable time without the fee earner needing to start a timer. For firms where time leakage is a known problem, this is worth evaluating specifically.

OneLaw supports manual entry, a live timer, and a Smart Find Time feature that prompts for missing time records based on activity. It is a more hands-on process, though the prompts help catch gaps that would otherwise go unrecorded.

AI tools

LEAP includes LawY, an AI legal research assistant built into the platform. Questions are answered from an expanding NZ legal knowledge base and verified by qualified NZ lawyers. It is included in the subscription. LEAP also includes Matter AI, which searches across all documents, emails, and attachments in a matter to answer questions, draft emails, summarise content, and compare documents. For structured document drafting, LEAP offers AI Prompts, a library of templates that feed into Matter AI for Word to produce matter-specific drafts.

OneLaw includes AI features for document summarisation and in-matter chat. LEAP has moved further in this area. Matter AI, AI Prompts, and LawY together cover legal research, matter analysis, email drafting, and document generation. For firms that want a more extensive AI suite built natively into their workflow, LEAP currently has the stronger offering.

Support

OneLaw's support team is NZ-based and includes ex-practice managers and trust accountants. For trust accounting queries and NZ-specific workflow questions, this tends to produce faster and more accurate answers.

LEAP has a NZ-based client support team available via live chat. Practitioner feedback on support quality is mixed. The depth of NZ legal practice knowledge (particularly for trust accounting) is less consistent than OneLaw's. The LEAP University online training resource is comprehensive, but favours firms that are willing to invest time in self-directed learning.

Contract terms

LEAP's contracts have been consistently flagged by NZ practitioners as problematic. Common concerns are minimum contract lengths, auto-renewal mechanics, and data exit provisions that are expensive and restrictive. Read it carefully before signing, particularly the exit clauses and data portability terms. Those are the parts that tend to catch firms off-guard.

OneLaw's contract terms are less frequently raised as a concern in practitioner feedback.

Which system suits which firm

It depends on the firm. And that is exactly why getting independent advice before committing matters.

Firms where trust accounting is central (the majority of NZ law firms) should start with OneLaw. The NZ-native design and NZLS auditor input give it a structural advantage for trust accounting compliance. Document automation out of the box isn't as strong, but you get a system built around what NZ trust account supervisors actually need.

Firms where trust accounting is not a requirement (a sole practitioner, a barrister in chambers, or a consultancy that does not hold client funds) can weigh the systems on features. In that case LEAP's document automation, AI tools, and automatic time capture are a serious option.

The risk worth naming: a firm could move to LEAP, gain real efficiency in document workflows, and find that trust accounting operations have slowed down significantly. Moving to OneLaw can go the other way — compliance fit is strong, but you are giving up LEAP's automation advantages. Neither is automatically the wrong call. The question is where the actual friction is in your firm.

What to ask in demos

For both vendors, ask them to demonstrate a three-way reconciliation using NZ trust account figures, walk through the TAS certificate workflow, and show IBD handling under s114. If they cannot do this with NZ-specific numbers in a NZ-specific format, that tells you something.

For LEAP: ask to see the NZ precedent library for your primary practice area, and how the Document Customisation Engine works with your own templates.

For OneLaw: ask how long it typically takes a new firm to build a usable precedent library, and what support is available during that process.

For both: ask for NZ reference firms of similar size and practice type. Speak to their trust account supervisors and fee earners separately. The experience often differs.

Getting independent advice

Valley IT provides vendor-neutral advice for NZ law firms evaluating practice management systems. No referral relationships, no commissions from any vendor. If you want help structuring the evaluation, preparing the right questions for vendor demos, or an independent view before you sign anything, we can help.

To talk through your situation, book a free 30-minute consultation or call 0800 824 848.