Legalnaut
Start a case review

CROSS-BORDER DISPUTES

One file, several languages, one chronology

A dispute running in two jurisdictions produces two case references, two sets of filings and correspondence in more than one language, describing the same events.

Questions this practice actually asks

“How do I manage a case running in two jurisdictions?”
One workspace holds both proceedings. Each court case is recognised from the documents, filings are grouped under it, and one chronology covers both, filterable to either.
“Can I search documents in two languages in one place?”
Search by meaning finds a paraphrase in the other language. The interface runs in nine languages, and the evidence stays in the language it was written in.
“How do I keep exhibit numbering straight across parallel proceedings?”
A matter numbers its exhibits once, with your prefix, and every export uses those numbers.

Two files that are really one

The same event is evidenced in both proceedings, and the connection lives in somebody's memory.

Translation destroys the quotation

A translated quotation is no longer the quotation, and it is the original that gets cited in a filing.

Case references multiply

Court references, filing numbers and cited precedent all look alike and get filed together.

What Legalnaut does about it

  • Evidence stays in its original language. Descriptions and summaries are translated; quotations are not.
  • Court references are classified by what they actually are, so a cited precedent does not open a new case.
  • One chronology covers both proceedings, filterable to either, and the deadline rules for Poland, Germany and Singapore each carry their provision.
A person's profile across both proceedings: what they said, what was said about them, the documents they wrote.

Start with one case file and a 14-day trial. See the plans.