Define event types before extracting dates

A Norwegian project file may include an English contract, Norwegian site minutes, revised programmes, and emails summarising progress. A date can represent a planned milestone, a forecast, an actual event, or a later account of what occurred. Label these categories before running extraction.

Use the chronology to organise evidence. Questions about notice, entitlement, causation, and applicable law need separate analysis. If the legal team researches a Norwegian provision in English, check the translation's status and date against the appropriate source.

Preserve language and document context

  • Original reference: filename, page, paragraph, or meeting item.
  • Language: original language and working translation status.
  • Date type: planned, forecast, actual, reported, or disputed.
  • Speaker: who made the statement and in what capacity.
  • Review status: source checked, translation checked, or unresolved.

Keep the document date separate from dates mentioned inside it. A meeting minute written after an event may be evidence of a later account rather than contemporaneous proof of the event itself.

Work through a disputed delivery sequence

Assume a programme forecasts delivery on 12 March, a site minute says access was unavailable on 14 March, and an email reports delivery on 17 March. An automated summary might turn this into a five-day supplier delay even though the sources do not establish the cause or contractual responsibility.

Create separate events for the forecast, access report, and reported delivery. Preserve the source and any contradictory evidence. Ask the technical and legal reviewers what further records they need. Do not turn an extracted sequence into a damages or extension-of-time conclusion.

Review translated events for meaning, not fluency

Check whether a translated verb describes a completed act, an intention, a request, or a conditional event. Review negation, qualifications, and references to attachments. Terminology for acceptance, completion, and delivery can affect how an English-speaking reviewer reads the record.

Use side-by-side comparison for significant passages and keep a short terminology list for the project. Judicio can assist with document translation and timeline extraction. It does not determine the evidential weight of a record or provide certification needed by a court, tribunal, or other recipient.

Hand over a chronology with an evidence request list

Export the reviewed events with source references and an explicit list of gaps: missing attachments, incomplete delivery records, uncertain dates, or disputed translations. Group open questions by the person who can answer them, such as the project team, technical expert, or legal reviewer.

Keep the chronology and the argument about its significance distinct. When new evidence changes an event, preserve a record of the correction and check affected downstream analysis. A useful chronology should make the uncertainty easier to investigate, rather than hide it behind a clean line of dates.

Sources and next steps

This is an editorial workflow guide for legal professionals. The suggested checks are our practical recommendations, not a statement that a regulator requires a particular software workflow.

Explore Timeline Builder and Translation, or review Judicio's regional coverage and limitations. Check the underlying source and your organisation's approved process before relying on an output.