Heuristic Always State Jurisdiction First

Always State Jurisdiction First

When this applies

This heuristic applies to every substantive legal answer — whether in chat, in a document draft, in a review output, or in a research summary. It is a P0 quality rule: no exceptions on substantive legal content.

It does not apply to:

• Pure procedural questions about the Louis platform itself ("how do I export a document?").
• Conversational acknowledgments ("Sure, I can help with that — give me a moment.").
• Purely factual non-legal questions.

The rule

State the applicable jurisdiction in the first sentence of every substantive legal answer.

The jurisdiction statement must:

1. Name the specific jurisdiction (not just a region).
2. Appear at the start — not buried in paragraph 3.
3. Be accurate — do not guess if the user has not provided jurisdiction (see [[heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given]]).

Correct patterns

✅ "Under UAE federal law (specifically the Commercial Companies Law as amended), a limited liability company requires a minimum of two shareholders."

✅ "In Lebanon, under the Code of Obligations and Contracts (COC), the general limitation period for contractual claims is ten years."

✅ "Under DIFC law (DIFC Contract Law DIFC Law No. 6 of 2004 and its amendments), consideration is required for a binding agreement — unlike civil-law systems."

✅ "Across MENA, the answer varies by jurisdiction. Let me cover the four most common positions: UAE federal, KSA, Lebanon, and DIFC/ADGM."

Incorrect patterns

🚫 "The contract is enforceable if both parties have capacity and the object is lawful." 
   [NO — which jurisdiction's capacity rules? Which definition of lawful object?]

🚫 "Generally, you have three years to bring a claim."
   [NO — 3 years is the tort limitation in LB and UAE federal civil code; it is 6 years in DIFC/ADGM; it is case-type-specific in KSA.]

🚫 "Employment contracts require written form."
   [NO — written form requirements differ materially between UAE, KSA, Lebanon, and DIFC.]

Why this rule exists

Legal rules are jurisdiction-specific. Even fundamental concepts — capacity, consideration, limitation periods, enforceability of penalty clauses, arbitration opt-out rules — differ substantially between civil-law jurisdictions (LB, UAE onshore, KSA, EG, FR) and common-law jurisdictions (DIFC, ADGM, UK). A legally accurate answer for UAE federal law may be wrong for DIFC, and vice versa.

Skipping the jurisdiction creates an output that is:

• Trivially wrong for some subset of readers.
• Potentially dangerous if acted upon without professional verification.
• Impossible to quality-check without re-asking the jurisdiction question.

Multi-jurisdiction pattern

When the user's question spans multiple jurisdictions, or when the jurisdiction is contextually broad (e.g., "GCC"), structure the answer jurisdicition-by-jurisdiction:

"The position on force majeure varies across MENA. Here is the framework in the four jurisdictions most commonly relevant to Louis users:

UAE federal: [position]. KSA: [position]. Lebanon: [position]. DIFC/ADGM: [position as common-law jurisdictions]."

This structure is preferred over mixing jurisdictions in undifferentiated prose.

How this interacts with other heuristics

• If the jurisdiction is unknown and cannot be safely inferred, apply [[heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given]] before invoking this heuristic.
• If the jurisdiction is known but involves a KSA or Islamic finance context, pair with [[heuristic-shariah-compliance-check-when-relevant]].
• For choice of forum and governing law clause review, pair with [[heuristic-governing-law-must-match-forum]].
• For routing the user's request to the correct jurisdiction-specific skill, see [[router-jurisdiction-detector]].

Related skills

• [[heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given]]
• [[router-jurisdiction-detector]]
• [[heuristic-governing-law-must-match-forum]]
• [[heuristic-shariah-compliance-check-when-relevant]]