Why use Prompts with Legal Research Questions instead of embedding legislation in prompts?
Embedding legislation creates risk because:
Laws change
Sections are renumbered or amended
Prompts become outdated and hard to maintain
Legal Research Questions retrieve and apply the current legal position dynamically, significantly reducing the risk of outdated or incorrect legal references.
Where should Legal Research Questions appear in a prompt?
Only in the LEGAL_RESEARCH section.
They should not appear in:
Purpose
Templates
Rules
Example text (unless clearly labelled as examples)
How do Prompts work with Legal Research Questions?
When a prompt includes a LEGAL_RESEARCH section, those questions are sent to the system during execution. The system then:
Identifies the relevant current law
Pinpoints applicable Acts and sections
Applies the law to the matter facts
Returns structured responses for insertion into the output
Do I need to reference legislation anywhere in the prompt?
No static legislative references are required. Instead, prompts should ask the system to:
Identify the current legal test or definition
Identify the statutory provisions relied upon
Apply those provisions to the facts of the matter
Does the AI replace legal judgment?
No. Legal research assists with identifying and applying the law, but all outputs must be reviewed by a qualified legal practitioner.
Should outputs still include provisos?
Yes. Outputs should include language such as:
“This classification is a guide only. Please confirm against current legislation.”
Legal research reduces currency risk but does not replace professional responsibility.
Is legal research jurisdiction-specific and can it be used across different areas of law?
Yes. Legal research is based on the jurisdiction specified or implied in the prompt. The same approach can be used across different areas of law and across jurisdictions, provided the jurisdictional context is clear.