Get the FREE Ultimate OpenClaw Setup Guide →

legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik

Scanned
npx machina-cli add skill lawvable/awesome-legal-skills/legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik --openclaw
Files (1)
SKILL.md
5.6 KB

Legal Risk Analysis

Assist an in-house legal team with legal research, risk evaluation, and analysis using GoodLegal's research tools. Do not provide legal advice — flag that analyses must be reviewed by qualified legal professionals.

Output Format

Adapt the output to whatever structure best serves the question — memo, bullet-point summary, narrative analysis, comparison table, or any combination. Two hard requirements:

  • Inline citations: every legal claim must link to its source (see references/citations.md)
  • Sources section: a consolidated list of all authorities at the end

Research Methodology

Follow these three steps before concluding on any legal question.

Step 1: Adversarial search for contradicting jurisprudence

After identifying the established legal position, actively search for decisions that contradict it. Formulate queries using terms like "nullité", "inopposable", "revirement", "contraire", or "primauté" in opposition to the position found.

Example: if case law validates extra-statutory acts signed unanimously, immediately search for "nullité acte extrastatutaire contraire statuts" or "primauté statuts décision unanime".

Step 2: Doctrinal and web search

Run at least one web_search per legal question targeting recent doctrinal commentary. Effective queries: "[topic] revirement jurisprudence [year]" or "[topic] arrêt récent Cour de cassation".

Step 3: Temporal confidence check

Check the date of the most recent decision supporting the position. If older than 3 years:

  • Lower confidence in the assessment
  • Run date-filtered case_search for the last 24 months
  • Flag in the analysis that the position relies on older jurisprudence

Research flow

For any legal question requiring case law analysis, complete at minimum:

  1. Initial search for the established position (case_search + legislation_search)
  2. Adversarial search for contradicting jurisprudence (case_search with contrary terms)
  3. Doctrinal web search for recent commentary (web_search)
  4. Temporal check: if the newest supporting case is >3 years old, run date-filtered searches for the last 24 months

Only after completing all four steps, proceed to the analysis. If any step reveals a contradiction or reversal, account for it and inform the user of the jurisprudential evolution.

GoodLegal MCP Tools

French law

ToolPurposeWhen to use
legislation_searchSearch across all French codes by topicStarting point for identifying relevant articles
legislation_retrieveRetrieve a specific article by referenceWhen you know the exact article (e.g., "article 1240 code civil")
case_searchSearch French case lawCore research tool — use date filters for temporal checks
case_retrieveRetrieve a specific decision by case numberWhen you have a pourvoi number — use include_full_text: true for raw text
case_legislationGet cases organized by codes/articles they citeUnderstanding how a specific area of law is applied
article_citation_searchFind cases citing a specific Légifrance article IDTracing how an article has been interpreted over time

EU law

ToolPurposeWhen to use
eu_caselaw_searchSearch EU court decisionsQuestions involving EU law, directives, or cross-border issues
eu_retrieveRetrieve EU legal texts by CELEX/directive numberWhen you need a specific directive or regulation

General

ToolPurposeWhen to use
web_searchAI-powered web search via PerplexityDoctrinal commentary, law firm articles — essential for Step 2
searchIntelligent routing across all GoodLegal endpointsQuick general queries when unsure which tool to use
single_text_legislationExtract legal references from textAnalyzing a contract clause or decision to identify all articles cited

Research strategy

  1. Start broad: legislation_searchlegislation_retrieve for exact articles
  2. Established position: case_search with descriptive terms
  3. Adversarial check: case_search with contrary terms (Step 1)
  4. Doctrinal check: web_search for recent commentary (Step 2)
  5. Temporal check: case_search with start_date set to 2 years ago if key cases are old (Step 3)
  6. Deep dive: case_retrieve on the most important decisions

Launch parallel searches (e.g., initial + adversarial) simultaneously.

Citation Standards

Golden rule: every hyperlink must come from a uri field returned by a GoodLegal tool call. Never fabricate Légifrance URLs — they contain opaque identifiers (LEGIARTI, JORFTEXT, etc.) that cannot be guessed. See references/citations.md for full formatting rules and examples.

When to Escalate

See references/escalation.md for guidance on when to engage outside counsel (mandatory, recommended, and discretionary triggers).

Source

git clone https://github.com/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills/blob/main/skills/legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik/SKILL.mdView on GitHub

Overview

This skill performs legal research and risk analysis using GoodLegal MCP tools. It helps evaluate case law, legislation, and regulatory risk, with a focus on French and EU law. It does not substitute for professional legal advice; analyses should be reviewed by qualified legal professionals.

How This Skill Works

Use GoodLegal MCP tools (e.g., legislation_search, legislation_retrieve, case_search, case_retrieve, case_legislation, and article_citation_search) to identify the established legal position. Then run an adversarial search for contrary authorities, follow with doctrinal and web searches, and perform a temporal check on the most recent supporting decisions. Output can be a memo or report with inline sources and a consolidated list of authorities.

When to Use It

  • When a user asks a legal question or wants research on case law or legislation
  • When you need a legal risk assessment for a contract, project, or policy
  • When the topic involves French or EU law
  • When regulatory analysis or compliance risk is required
  • When a legal memo with cited authorities is needed

Quick Start

  1. Step 1: Define the jurisdiction and the precise legal question you want answered
  2. Step 2: Run initial searches with legislation_search/case_search and note key authorities
  3. Step 3: Synthesize findings into a memo with inline citations and a consolidated sources list

Best Practices

  • Clarify jurisdiction, scope, and the exact legal question before starting searches
  • Use the full GoodLegal MCP toolset (case_search, legislation_search, web_search, etc.) in a structured sequence
  • Perform adversarial search to identify contradictory authorities
  • Cite every legal claim with sources and provide a consolidated authorities list
  • Flag if the newest supporting decision is older than 3 years and note potential jurisprudential evolution

Example Use Cases

  • Assess the enforceability of a contract clause under French civil code
  • Research recent EU regulations impacting cross-border data transfers
  • Evaluate regulatory risk for a product labeling requirement in France
  • Prepare a memo comparing jurisprudence on non-compete clauses
  • Trace how a Légifrance article has been interpreted across cases using article citation search

Frequently Asked Questions

Add this skill to your agents
Sponsor this space

Reach thousands of developers