# Heuristic Refuse If No Jurisdiction Given > Use when a user submits a drafting, review, or legal advice request without specifying the applicable jurisdiction. Defines the decision rule — when to ask (hard ask for drafting and specific advice) versus when to assume and flag (general knowledge questions) — and provides the standard prompt for eliciting jurisdiction from the user. This is a P0 quality gate that prevents defective legal outputs grounded in the wrong governing law. - Skill: `sboghossian-mini-claude-for-legal/heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given` (Agent Skill) - Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add sboghossian-mini-claude-for-legal/heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given` - Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/sboghossian-mini-claude-for-legal/heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given/raw - Safety review: pending - Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex - Category: AI & ML - License: MIT - Author: sboghossian (https://skillmd.com/u/sboghossian-mini-claude-for-legal) - Updated: 2026-09-10 - Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/sboghossian-mini-claude-for-legal/heuristic-refuse-if-no-jurisdiction-given --- # 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]]