Scope the forum before organising the evidence
A Dubai commercial dispute might involve a mainland contract, a DIFC jurisdiction clause, an ADGM entity and correspondence from overseas. Those facts do not by themselves resolve which court can hear the dispute or which law governs each issue. Record counsel's forum assessment, any uncertainty and the purpose of the work product.
Use separate research questions for governing law, jurisdiction, procedure and enforcement. The DIFC Courts rules directory and ADGM legislation and procedures provide starting points for their respective systems. Confirm amendments and case-specific orders; a generic UAE checklist cannot replace them.
Judicio's UAE legal research uses curated public-web search. It does not provide a dedicated UAE court, DIFC or ADGM database connector. Record unavailable decisions or documents and use appropriate official or licensed resources to close material gaps.
Create a bilingual document register
Give each original document a stable identifier. Record its language, sender, recipient, date, attachment family, version and source location. Link a working or certified translation to that identifier and state which kind of translation it is. Do not present a generated translation as certified.
| Evidence record | Review check |
|---|---|
| Arabic notice and English translation | Match paragraph references, qualifications and named parties |
| Email and attached notice | Distinguish transmission time from the notice's date |
| Revised project programme | Identify the revision and whether it supersedes the earlier version |
| Courier or delivery record | Identify what was delivered and what the record actually proves |
In Translation, compare source and working text, especially negatives, dates, sums and exceptions. Arrange qualified review and any required certification for the intended use.
Worked example: notice date and delivery date
Fictional construction dispute: an Arabic notice bears 3 June, an email transmitting a scan is sent on 4 June, and a courier record records delivery on 6 June. An English working translation calls 3 June the delivery date. A generated chronology then treats that date as the start of a contractual response period.
Correct the translation and create separate events for the notice date, electronic transmission and recorded delivery. Check the documents and applicable notice provisions before identifying any operative trigger. Counsel must assess service, contractual effect and time calculation; the AI chronology should not silently make those decisions.
Retain the initial error in the review log, the corrected source references and any unresolved question about recipients or attachments. This makes the correction reusable when the evidence summary is updated.
Link disputed issues to evidence and counter-evidence
Build an issue list before asking for a narrative. For each allegation, record the supporting passage, contrary material, missing evidence and the person reviewing it. A party's assertion is not a judicial finding, and an internal summary is not a substitute for the original record.
Use Case Strategy for working analysis of the supplied material and Timeline Builder for a source-linked sequence. Check that drafts identify uncertainty rather than strengthening a claim beyond the evidence. Keep privileged analysis and documents subject to disclosure restrictions within the approved access process.
A short exception table often helps counsel more than a longer undifferentiated summary: which date is disputed, which translation needs checking, which attachment is absent and what decision depends on resolving it.
Separate the working handover from the court filing
Prepare a handover with the document index, verified chronology, translation status, open issues and current source references. Check page numbering and every citation after any document is added or replaced. Remove duplicate copies only after preserving their provenance and context.
Then verify the receiving court's prescribed forms, filing rules, bundle requirements and relevant orders. ADGM's forms and guides expressly direct users to the applicable rules and practice directions. This workflow does not produce an automatically court-compliant bundle or file documents with a court.
For the broader matter setup, use the Dubai, DIFC and mainland intake map. For a more specific review task, see the DIFC document-production request guide.
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 Case Strategy and Translation and Timeline Builder, or review Judicio's regional coverage and limitations. Check the underlying source and your organisation's approved process before relying on an output.