Prompts
Prompts de IA jurídica para Germany
4 prompts que você pode colar direto no HAQQ ou em qualquer outro assistente. Cada um está escrito por inteiro. Abra, copie e altere as partes entre colchetes.
Works Council Bonus Scheme Negotiation MemoMemoStarterCompensation & Benefits
You are in-house counsel at a German employer preparing a formal negotiation memo on introducing a variable pay scheme that requires agreement with the works council. The memo goes to the head of legal and the HR director before the first meeting. Facts: the employer is [Employer Name] with about [Headcount] employees at [Site]; the proposed scheme is [Scheme Description]; the works council has so far asked for [Council Demands]; and management's fixed limit is [Budget Limit]. Deliverables: 1. The topics on which the works council has a codetermination right, and the topics that remain management's decision. 2. Our opening position, our fallback and our walk-away point on each open term. 3. The concessions the council may value most, and what to ask in exchange. 4. The route if talks fail, including conciliation, and its timing risk. Mandatory rules: never invent a statute, article number, case name or citation, and cite the named source for every rule or deadline, or mark it unverified and flag it for German counsel. Do not state that a term is subject to codetermination unless you can point to the rule.
German Patent Dispute Settlement Playbook for the BoardPlaybookEnterpriseIP Disputes
You are counsel to a company accused of patent infringement in Germany and are preparing a concise negotiation playbook for its board. The board must see the leverage on each side, the decisions it reserves, and the points at which the plan changes. Facts: our company is [Our Company] and the patent holder is [Patent Holder]; the patent is [Patent Description] and the accused product is [Accused Product]; proceedings are at [Procedural Position] before [Forum]; the patent holder demands [Holder Demand]; our annual sales of the product in the relevant markets are [Product Revenue]; and the board's authority limit for settlement is [Settlement Authority]. Deliverables: 1. A one-page summary of the dispute and what the board is being asked to approve. 2. A leverage map for both sides, covering the risk of an injunction, the chance and timing of a separate validity challenge, and costs. 3. The effect of the court or forum and whether a parallel action before the Unified Patent Court or abroad changes the balance. 4. Settlement structures with their trade-offs: lump sum, running royalty, cross-licence, design-around period and sell-off period. 5. An opening position, a target and a walk-away point for each term, within [Settlement Authority]. 6. A sequence of moves with decision gates: what we do before the next hearing, what we offer if a validity challenge is filed, and when we escalate. 7. Interim risks to manage, such as enforcement of a provisional injunction and security, with a recommended response. 8. Communications rules: who may speak to the other side, to customers and to the market. 9. Board decisions needed now versus those delegated to management. Mandatory rules: never invent a statute, article number, case name or citation, and cite the named source for every rule, royalty benchmark or deadline, or mark it unverified and flag it for German patent counsel. Do not predict the outcome of the infringement or validity questions, and where the German courts and another forum could reach different results, describe both and do not choose. Keep every item concise and ready for a board paper.
Plain-Language Summary of a German Restructuring ProcessMemoEnterpriseEmployment
You are writing, for a business client with no legal training, a plain-language memo that summarises the process and risks of a planned restructuring with job losses at a German site, and the memo must let the client see what happens in what order and what only the client can decide. Facts: the client is [Client company], the site is [Site and location], the plan is [Restructuring plan in brief], the number of employees affected is [Number affected] out of [Total employees at the site], a works council exists [Yes or no], the target date for the first exits is [Target date], and the groups with special protection are [Protected employees]. Deliverables: 1. A bottom line in three sentences on whether the plan can run on the target date. 2. A numbered timeline of the steps in the order they must happen, from consulting the works council to notices to leave, with the earliest and latest point for each. 3. A short explanation of the difference between consulting the works council on the change, negotiating a reconciliation of interests and negotiating a social plan, and what each can delay. 4. The notification to the employment authorities, when it is needed and what happens if it is missed. 5. The selection of who leaves, the social criteria and the employees who need extra protection or approval first. 6. A table of money exposure with the main cost lines, the party that decides each one and the assumptions behind each estimate. 7. The three decisions the client must take, with the cost of delay for each. 8. A glossary of every German term used, in one line each. Mandatory rules: never invent a statute, article number, case name or citation, and cite the named source for every rule, threshold or deadline or mark it unverified and flag it for German counsel. Write for a reader with no legal background, and explain any term before using it. Where the facts are missing, list the question to ask instead of guessing. Do not promise that the plan will succeed and do not describe this memo as advice on the client's final decision.
Board Letter Explaining a German Cease-and-Desist WarningLetter / EmailAdvancedIP Disputes
You are explaining to the board of a company that has received a cease-and-desist warning from a competitor in Germany, known as an Abmahnung, what it means and what the company must decide. Write a short letter to the board in concise language, with no legal jargon the directors cannot follow. Facts: the company is [Company Name] and the sender of the warning is [Sender Name]; the warning alleges [Alleged IP Infringement]; it demands [Demands Made] by [Deadline Given]; it encloses a draft declaration to stop and pay a penalty if the conduct recurs, which says [Draft Declaration Terms]; the company's use of the disputed sign, work or product is [Company's Use]; the sender's claim for legal costs is [Costs Claimed]. Deliverables: 1. A paragraph explaining in plain words what an Abmahnung is and why it is usually the step before a court application for an injunction. 2. The three options open to the board: comply, respond with a modified declaration or reject, with the main consequence of each. 3. Why the deadline matters and what can happen if it passes, including the possibility of a fast interim court order. 4. A caution about the draft declaration, explaining that a signed declaration to stop can bind the company for a long time and may be wider than the alleged conduct. 5. The decision the board must take now, who should take advice and the information needed first. Mandatory rules: never invent a statute, section number, case name or citation; cite the named source for every rule, time limit or costs principle, or mark it unverified and flag it for local counsel in Germany. Do not tell the board to sign or to refuse. Do not say that the claim is well founded or baseless. Say that the deadline should be confirmed with German counsel at once and that nothing should be signed before then. This letter is general explanation for directors and is not legal advice on the company's specific situation.