प्रॉम्प्ट
Cross-border के लिए कानूनी AI प्रॉम्प्ट
7 prompts you can paste straight into HAQQ or any other assistant. Every one is written out in full. Open it, copy it, change the bracketed parts.
Compare a Rule Across Two JurisdictionsReportExpertCorporate / Commercial
I act for [my client's role]. Compare the treatment of [the legal question] under the law of [jurisdiction A] and the law of [jurisdiction B]. Return a comparison table with one row per issue and these columns: the issue, the position in A with its article, the position in B with its article, whether the difference is material in practice, and what it means for a party structuring around it. Then: 1. Name the issues where the two systems reach the same result by different routes. Those are the ones people get wrong. 2. Name the issues where they genuinely diverge, and which is more favourable to [my client's role]. 3. Say what happens if a contract picks A's law but the dispute is heard in B, or the assets are in B. 4. Flag any point that is mandatory in one system and therefore not displaceable by choosing the other's law. Mandatory rules: give the article for each position, and quote the operative words of the provision where the exact wording drives the answer. Where you cannot find the rule in one of the two systems, write 'not found for [jurisdiction]' in that cell rather than filling it by analogy with the other. A comparison table with an invented cell is worse than an incomplete one.
Enforcing an Award From a Unilaterally Appointed ArbitratorMemoEnterpriseArbitration
I act for the [claimant / respondent]. Can an award made by an arbitrator appointed unilaterally by one party be enforced in [jurisdiction]? Answer yes or no in the first line, then justify it. Address: 1. The rule on constitution of the tribunal in that jurisdiction's arbitration law, and whether unilateral appointment goes to validity of the award or only to a ground of challenge. 2. Where this sits under the New York Convention grounds for refusal, and whether the enforcing court reviews it of its own motion or only on the respondent's application. 3. Whether the objection is lost by participating in the arbitration without protest, and what counts as a timely protest. 4. The distinction between setting aside at the seat and refusing enforcement elsewhere. An award set aside at the seat and an award merely challenged are not the same case. 5. The practical route for my client as [claimant / respondent], with deadlines. Mandatory rules: cite the article for each ground under both the arbitration statute and the Convention, and keep the two separate rather than merging them. If the answer depends on the seat, ask me for the seat rather than assuming it, and mark any point where courts in that jurisdiction have not settled the question. Quote the operative text of the New York Convention article and the corresponding article of the arbitration statute at the seat wherever the two provisions differ, rather than paraphrasing either one.
Cross-Border SaaS: Hosting, Users and RegulatorMemoEnterprisePrivacy & Data Protection
A software company in [country] is selling a SaaS contract to a [bank / regulated entity] in [country]. Data will be hosted in [location], with end users across [countries]. Advise the software company: 1. Which data protection regimes actually apply, and on what connecting factor for each: establishment, targeting, the location of the data, or the customer's own regulatory obligations flowing down. 2. The transfer mechanism needed for each cross-border flow, and whether hosting in a third country changes it. 3. What the customer's financial regulator will require of us as an outsourced service provider: audit rights, sub-processor approval, exit assistance, records retention, incident notification windows, and the regulator's own right of access. 4. Data localisation or residency rules that would defeat the proposed hosting location outright. This is the question that kills deals, so answer it early. 5. The contractual package: which of these belong in the MSA, the DPA and the security schedule, and what our fallback is on each of the three points the bank will not move on. 6. A dated action list for getting to signature. Mandatory rules: name each law and article. Where a rule is issued by a regulator rather than a statute, say which regulator and which circular. Where you are not certain a requirement is in force, mark it for verification rather than stating it flatly.
Cross-Border Data Transfer AssessmentMemoAdvancedPrivacy & Data Protection
You are advising on whether it is lawful to transfer personal data from [origin country/region] to [destination country]. Facts: origin [origin country/region], destination [destination country], the categories of personal data and the purpose of the transfer as described by the client. Deliverables: 1. Whether an adequacy decision covers the destination; if none is given in the facts, say so rather than assuming one exists. 2. The appropriate safeguard available if there is no adequacy decision: standard contractual clauses, binding corporate rules, or another recognized mechanism, and why it fits this transfer. 3. A Schrems II style assessment of the destination's surveillance and access laws, and the supplementary measures needed to address any gap. 4. Practical risk if the transfer proceeds without supplementary measures. 5. A recommendation on whether to proceed, pause, or restructure the transfer. Mandatory rules: do not state that a named adequacy decision or safeguard applies to [destination country] unless you can identify it; otherwise flag it for confirmation against the current list before this assessment is relied on. This assessment is an analysis aid for a qualified practitioner, not a substitute for formal legal advice on this transfer.
Cross-Border Payment Compliance ReviewReportExpertFinTech / Payments
You are conducting a compliance review of [Company's] cross-border payment operations. Facts: the payment corridors [Company's] business operates in, the currencies handled, and the specific [jurisdictions] in scope for this review. Deliverables: 1. A summary of licensing requirements for payment or money transmission activity in each of the [jurisdictions], and whether [Company's] business currently holds the relevant authorization. 2. A review of sanctions screening controls, including list coverage and the point in the transaction flow where screening occurs. 3. An assessment of applicable FX regulations, including reporting thresholds and any restrictions on the currencies involved. 4. A review of correspondent banking relationships, including any concentration risk if a single correspondent bank were to exit. 5. A list of regulatory reporting obligations that apply in each of the [jurisdictions], with filing frequency and the authority each report goes to. 6. A risk rating for each finding (high, medium, low) with the reasoning behind it. Mandatory rules: do not state that a licence, exemption, or reporting obligation applies in a given jurisdiction unless it is tied to a named statute or regulator guidance, flag it for local counsel confirmation instead. This is an analysis aid for a qualified lawyer to review, not a substitute for jurisdiction-specific regulatory advice.
Cross-Border Employment ComparisonReportExpertEmployment
Compare employment law requirements across [list jurisdictions] for a company hiring remote employees in each. Facts: the roles being hired (describe), whether hires will be direct employees or engaged through an employer of record (state which), and the anticipated headcount per jurisdiction (describe). Deliverables, one section per jurisdiction in [list jurisdictions] plus a summary table: 1. Minimum employment terms: required contract content and mandatory clauses. 2. Statutory benefits: leave, social security and other mandatory contributions. 3. Notice periods and termination protections, including any collective or works council requirements. 4. Data privacy obligations affecting the employment relationship and cross border data transfer. 5. Employer of record considerations: where an EOR is required or advisable, and the associated compliance burden. 6. A summary table ranking the jurisdictions by relative complexity of compliant hiring. Mandatory rules: cite the specific statute or regulation for every notice period, benefit entitlement or termination rule stated, where a rule cannot be attributed to a named source, mark it as needing local counsel confirmation rather than stating a figure.
Power of Attorney for a Cross-Border TransactionAgreementAdvancedCorporate / Commercial
Act as counsel drafting a power of attorney by which [PRINCIPAL: individual or company, with nationality and place of registration] appoints [ATTORNEY] to act in [COUNTRY] for the purpose of [ACTS TO BE PERFORMED: sign a sale contract, register property, open a bank account, incorporate an entity, represent before a court or authority, collect a debt]. It will be executed in [COUNTRY OF EXECUTION] and used before [RECEIVING BODY]. Two failures account for most rejected powers of attorney: a general grant where the receiving body demands specific authority for the exact act, and a formality gap between where the document was signed and where it must be used. Draft against both. Do not state a local form requirement you cannot attribute to a named source; mark it To Be Confirmed. Return: (1) Power of Attorney: full text, and in bilingual columns where the receiving body works in a different language, with clause numbering aligned across the two versions; (2) Scope of Authority, the specific acts listed one by one in the terms the receiving body will look for, with a note on which of them will be read narrowly and therefore have to be named expressly; (3) Limits and Safeguards, monetary caps, prohibited acts, express treatment of self-dealing and of the attorney acting for both sides, sub-delegation, and whether the attorney may sign anything that binds the principal beyond this transaction; (4) Duration and Revocation, start, expiry, the acts that survive expiry, how revocation is made effective against the receiving body and against a third party who has not been told; (5) Corporate Authority Chain: for a company principal, the board or shareholder resolution behind it, the signatory's own authority, and the corporate documents the notary will demand; (6) Execution and Authentication, notary, witnesses, seal, translation, and the legalisation or apostille chain from [COUNTRY OF EXECUTION] to [COUNTRY], in order with realistic lead times; (7) Rejection Risks, the five things most likely to cause the receiving body to refuse it, each with the drafting or process fix; (8) Confirmation Questions, the short list to put to the receiving body and to local counsel before signing, because a defective power of attorney is usually discovered at the counter. This is a drafting aid for a qualified practitioner, not legal advice.