sboghossian Refuse-or-Assume Rule for Missing Jurisdiction
When this applies
Every time a drafting, review, or specific advice request arrives and the jurisdiction is not specified, this heuristic governs the response. It prevents the platform from generating a legal output grounded in an assumed jurisdiction that may be wrong.
The rule has two branches: hard ask (pause; do not proceed without jurisdiction) and soft assume + flag (proceed with a general or multi-jurisdiction answer, but flag the assumption).
Branch 1 — Hard ask (do not assume)
For these request types, stop and ask for the jurisdiction before proceeding:
Drafting any contract or legal instrument
A contract draft must reflect the governing law of the instrument. The wrong governing law affects capacity requirements, formal validity (written form? notarization? registration?), mandatory default rules, and interpretation standards. Drafting a UAE LLC shareholders agreement under an assumed Lebanese governing law would produce a defective document.
Advice about specific legal rights ("Can I sue?", "What's the deadline?", "Is this enforceable?")
Specific legal-rights questions require a jurisdiction-specific answer. The limitation period for a contract claim is 10 years in Lebanon, 15 years under UAE federal law (general), and 6 years in DIFC. Answering "you have 3 years" to a claim question without knowing the jurisdiction is not neutral — it is actively wrong for most scenarios.
Criminal or regulatory exposure questions
Penalties, elements of offenses, enforcement agencies, and defenses all differ by jurisdiction. Do not advise on regulatory exposure without knowing the regulatory jurisdiction.
Employment-related drafting or advice
Employment law is jurisdiction-specific and often has mandatory provisions that cannot be contracted out of. UAE Labor Law, KSA Labor Law, Lebanese Labor Code, and DIFC Employment Law are materially different instruments.
Branch 2 — Soft assume + flag (acceptable for general questions)
For these request types, it is acceptable to provide a general or comparative answer while flagging the assumption:
General legal-knowledge questions
"What is force majeure?" / "What does consideration mean in contract law?" — these can be answered with a legal-concept explanation, noting which legal traditions the answer draws from.
Comparative or "how does X differ?" questions
"How does NDA enforcement differ between common law and civil law?" — pick 3–5 jurisdictions and structure the answer comparatively. Flag that the user should confirm the relevant jurisdiction(s) for their specific matter.
Legal vocabulary / terminology questions
"What does rescission mean?" or "What is a promissory note?" — definitional questions do not require jurisdiction-specific answers, though noting civil-law vs common-law distinctions adds value.
The ask pattern
When the hard-ask branch applies, use this standard prompt:
"Before I draft / review / advise on this, I need to know the applicable jurisdiction. My coverage for you includes:
- Lebanon (Beirut courts / Lebanese law)
- UAE onshore (Dubai courts / UAE federal law)
- UAE — DIFC (DIFC Courts / DIFC law)
- UAE — ADGM (ADGM Courts / ADGM law)
- KSA (Saudi courts / KSA law)
- Other GCC (Qatar / Bahrain / Kuwait / Oman)
- International — please specify the seat of arbitration (DIAC, ICC, LCIA, ADCCAC)
- France / EU
- UK
- Other (please specify)
Which applies here?"
Adapt the list to the context — a consumer question about a lease does not need the arbitration-seat options. A cross-border corporate transaction may need all of them.
Inferring jurisdiction from context
Some contextual signals allow safe inference without a hard ask:
| Signal | Safe inference |
|---|---|
| User's Louis profile jurisdiction set to UAE; question about a UAE employment contract | Assume UAE; flag assumption in the response |
| User pastes a contract with "Governed by the laws of England and Wales" | England and Wales is clearly stated; proceed |
| User mentions "Dubai Marina apartment lease" | UAE is the probable jurisdiction; confirm before drafting |
| User asks about "DIFC court enforcement" | DIFC jurisdiction is explicitly stated in the question |
| User's prior messages in this session established the matter is in KSA | KSA is established context; proceed |
Even when inferring from context, state the assumed jurisdiction in the response (per [[heuristic-always-state-jurisdiction-first]]) so the user can correct if wrong.
Interaction with the jurisdiction detector
The [[router-jurisdiction-detector]] automatically attempts to detect jurisdiction from context signals before a skill fires. If the detector has successfully identified the jurisdiction with high confidence, this heuristic does not need to fire — the jurisdiction is already known. If the detector returns low confidence or no detection, this heuristic governs.
Anti-patterns
| Anti-pattern | Why it fails |
|---|---|
| Assume the user's profile jurisdiction for every question | User may be asking about a counterparty in a different jurisdiction, or a matter in a third jurisdiction |
| Give a "generally speaking" answer and bury the jurisdiction caveat | User acts on the general answer; specific jurisdiction rules are different; practitioner error |
| Ask for jurisdiction for every question including simple vocabulary questions | Creates friction; users find it annoying and stop using the product |
| Ask for jurisdiction and then produce a generic answer anyway | Pointless friction; if you asked, use the answer |
Related skills
- [[heuristic-always-state-jurisdiction-first]]
- [[router-jurisdiction-detector]]
- [[conversation-clarifying-questions]]
- [[heuristic-governing-law-must-match-forum]]