Client update from case correspondence

Nothing here is legal advice. A draft is a starting point for a qualified person, not a substitute for one.

Use one controlled pass to turn a defined bundle of recent case material into a draft update. This is for solicitors and legal executives who need a clear reporting routine across active matters. Nothing here is legal advice. The draft is a starting point for a qualified person, not a substitute for one.

1. Set the reporting boundary

Choose the matter and the period before you provide any documents. Write these details in your working note:

• Client or matter reference
• Report period, for example 1 May 2026 to 31 May 2026
• Date and time at which deadlines are checked
• Documents included
• Documents known to be missing
• Name of the solicitor who will review the draft

Collect only material that can support the update. This will usually include:

• Incoming and outgoing correspondence
• Sealed or draft orders
• Hearing notices and court communications
• Attendance notes from calls, conferences and hearings
• Agreed timetables, directions and procedural notices

Put files in date order. Give each item a short source label, such as Order dated 14 May, Opponent email 16 May, or Attendance note, client call 21 May. If you paste text rather than attach files, paste the source label before each extract.

Do not ask the model to infer what happened from a document title. A file called Final order may be an unsealed draft. A letter headed without prejudice may not be suitable for a general client update. Decide what material may be used under your firm's procedures before supplying it.

2. Extract the case events first

Ask for an event list before asking for prose. This separates factual extraction from drafting and makes review quicker.

Use this instruction, replacing the square brackets:

You are assisting with a draft client update for solicitor review. Nothing in your output is legal advice.

Matter reference: [reference]
Reporting period: [start date] to [end date]
Deadline check date: [date and time]

Read only the labelled material below. Produce a dated event list in chronological order. For each event, give:
1. date, or say "date not stated";
2. source label;
3. what the document expressly says happened;
4. any action requested of our client;
5. any stated deadline, including the exact wording and date;
6. uncertainty, inconsistency or missing information.

Do not infer service, agreement, compliance, filing, extensions, procedural effect or legal consequences. Do not calculate a deadline unless the source expressly gives one. Quote the relevant wording for every deadline.

[Paste or attach labelled material]

Read the resulting list against the source documents. Correct obvious transcription errors in the source material or labels, then run the extraction again if needed. Do not edit a disputed event into a more certain statement merely to make the update read smoothly.

3. Separate facts, requests and deadlines

Make three short working lists from the event output. This is the key habit. A client needs to know what has occurred, what you need from them, and what happens next. Those are not the same thing.

List	Include	Do not include without review
What has happened	Dated procedural steps, correspondence received, hearings attended, documents served where expressly recorded	Assumptions about validity, effect or compliance
Client input needed	Documents, instructions, approvals or factual confirmation requested	Advice on what the client should decide
Next dates	Dates stated in an order, notice, timetable or correspondence	Calculated dates, assumed extensions or dates from memory

For each client request, record four fields: the item, why it is needed in plain language, who should provide it, and the requested date. If no date is stated, write Date to be confirmed by solicitor rather than creating one.

For every deadline, preserve the exact source and distinguish between a fixed date and a date that needs calculation or procedural interpretation. For example:

• 14 June 2026, stated in Order dated 14 May, paragraph 3
• Deadline may require calculation from service, solicitor to confirm

This avoids presenting an unverified calculation as a procedural deadline. Features, file handling and output behaviour can vary, so check the current guidance in the xAI documentation overview before changing an established matter workflow.

4. Draft the update in a fixed structure

Once the lists are checked, ask for a concise draft. Use headings that your clients will recognise. Keep the update factual and avoid predicting outcomes.

Using the checked event list below, draft a client update for solicitor review.

Use these headings exactly:
1. Position since our last update
2. Documents or decisions we need from you
3. Next dates
4. Points being checked

Rules:
- Write in plain English.
- Put events in date order.
- State the source date for each next date.
- Describe only facts supported by the event list.
- Where the material is uncertain, say what is being checked and do not resolve it.
- Do not provide legal advice, predict outcomes, or state that a procedural requirement has been met unless the source expressly says so.
- End with: "This draft is subject to solicitor review."

[Paste checked event list and the three working lists]

Keep the request for documents separate from the procedural history. A client can then reply with the requested material without having to identify it within a long narrative.

5. Check the draft before it reaches the client

Review the draft with the underlying documents open. Check dates first, then attribution, then wording. These are the errors most likely to affect action on the matter.

If you see this	Check	What to do
A deadline without a source	The order, notice or email	Add the source, or move it to Points being checked
A confident statement with no document support	Whether it is an inference	Replace it with the stated fact or remove it
A client request with no owner	The attendance note or solicitor instructions	Name the client contact or mark it for allocation
Two different dates	The document date, service wording and any later correspondence	Flag the conflict for solicitor review, do not choose one in the draft

The output is going wrong if it turns tentative material into certainty, combines separate events, or hides a missing document. It is also wrong if it treats a request in correspondence as an agreed direction, or if it reports a deadline without showing whether it is stated or needs calculation. These are review issues, not drafting style issues.

Read the final text as the client would. Can they answer three questions quickly: what has happened, what do you need from me, and what date needs attention? Then have the responsible solicitor confirm the procedural position, advice and final wording before sending.

When the process does not work

Stop and narrow the task if the output is muddled, incomplete or overconfident. Go back to the dated event list, add source labels, split a large bundle by document type or week, and rerun the extraction. If a deadline depends on service, calculation, interpretation, an extension or a disputed account of events, mark it for solicitor review rather than asking the model to decide it. Keep the draft out of client circulation until a qualified person has checked it.