---

name: import-statute-analysis-rafal-fryc
description: Use when migrating the Rafal Fryc statute-analysis methodology into the mini-claude-for-legal format. This adapter preserves structured legislative text analysis — section-by-section decomposition, applicability scoping, definitional chain tracing, and cross-reference mapping — mapped into the standard skill model. Strong for civil-code jurisdictions (France, Lebanon, UAE onshore, Poland) and EU regulatory instruments. Triggers on import of any statute-analysis skill attributed to the Fryc approach.
license: MIT
metadata:
id: import.statute-analysis-rafal-fryc
category: import
jurisdictions: [FR, LB, UAE, EU, PL, multi]
priority: P3
intent: [import, statute-analysis, legislative-analysis, migration, civil-law]
related: [import-legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik, import-contract-review-anthropic, import-legal-simulation-patrick-munro, kb-gdpr-data-protection]
source: Louis — HAQQ Legal AI (github.com/sboghossian/mini-claude-for-legal)
version: "1.0"

Import: Statute Analysis (Rafal Fryc)

What it does

This import adapter migrates a statute-analysis skill modelled on the Rafal Fryc methodology into the mini-claude-for-legal standard format. The Fryc methodology is a structured approach to legislative text: it treats a statute or regulation as a formal system, tracing definitions through their references, mapping the applicability scope before interpreting substantive obligations, and surfacing interpretive conflicts between provisions.

This methodology is particularly valuable for civil-law jurisdictions where statutes are the primary source of law (France, Lebanon, UAE Civil Code, EU Regulations) — unlike common-law jurisdictions where case law often fills the gaps that civil codes leave open.

Import config

Field	Source mapping	Default if absent
analysis_mode	Legacy mode	full (definition + scope + obligations + cross-references)
definitional_chain	Legacy trace_definitions boolean	true
cross_reference_map	Legacy map_xrefs boolean	true
applicability_scope	Legacy check_scope boolean	true
conflict_check	Legacy check_conflicts boolean	true
output_format	Legacy format	statute_analysis_memo
jurisdiction	Legacy jurisdiction	FR (Fryc's primary)
language	Legacy lang	fr

Dry-run preview

IMPORT PREVIEW — statute-analysis-rafal-fryc
Source shape       : Statute analysis (Fryc methodology)
Mode               : full
Definitional chain : traced
Cross-references   : mapped
Applicability scope: checked
Conflict check     : enabled
Language           : French
Jurisdiction       : France (civil law; override for other jurisdictions)
Output             : statute_analysis_memo

Fryc analysis methodology (post-import)

Step 1 — Applicability scoping

Before analysing what the statute requires, determine who it applies to:

• Personal scope: which persons, entities, or roles does the statute address? What are the thresholds (e.g. company size, turnover, number of employees)?
• Material scope: which activities, transactions, or subject matter does it cover?
• Territorial scope: which geographic locations or establishments does it reach?
• Temporal scope: when did it enter into force? Are there transitional provisions? Has it been amended?

Step 2 — Definitional chain tracing

Statutes define key terms, but definitions reference other definitions. The Fryc approach traces the complete definitional chain:

DEFINED TERM → definition → references to OTHER defined terms
                         → traces each referenced term in turn
                         → flags circular definitions (common in EU regulations)

Example (GDPR): "personal data" → "identified or identifiable natural person" → "identifiable" → "identification by reference to an identifier" → back to "identifiers" (non-exhaustive list)

Step 3 — Obligation mapping

For each substantive provision:

• Who is the obligated person? (controller, processor, employer, operator)
• What is the obligation? (must, shall, is required to)
• What are the conditions? (triggers, thresholds, exceptions)
• What is the consequence of non-compliance? (penalty, sanction, nullity, liability)

Step 4 — Cross-reference mapping

Identify internal and external cross-references:

• Internal: "as defined in Article X", "subject to Article Y"
• External: references to other statutes, EU instruments, implementing regulations
• Flag any reference to a provision that has been repealed, amended, or is pending

Step 5 — Interpretive conflict identification

• Are there two provisions that apply to the same situation but point in different directions?
• Does a later provision override an earlier one (lex posterior)?
• Does a specific provision override a general one (lex specialis)?
• Are there gaps (situations the statute does not address) that must be filled by analogy or judicial construction?

Output schema

STATUTE ANALYSIS MEMO

Instrument     : [statute name, number, date]
Jurisdiction   : [jurisdiction]
Analysis date  : [date]

1. APPLICABILITY SCOPE
   Personal scope  : [who it applies to]
   Material scope  : [what it covers]
   Territorial scope: [where it applies]
   In force since  : [date]; last amended: [date]

2. KEY DEFINITIONS
   [Term] : [definition + chain trace]
   ...

3. OBLIGATION MAP
   [Party] must [obligation] when [conditions] under Art [X]
   Penalty for non-compliance: [consequence]
   ...

4. CROSS-REFERENCES
   Internal: [list]
   External: [list; flag repealed/amended]

5. INTERPRETIVE ISSUES
   [Conflict or gap description]
   Recommended approach: [interpretation method]

Jurisdictional notes

Jurisdiction	Civil-law interpretation rules
France	Code Civil Art 4: judge cannot refuse to decide even if law is silent; systematic interpretation preferred
Lebanon	Code of Obligations (French-inspired); Arabic and French versions both official
UAE Civil Code	Federal Law 5/1985; good faith (Art 246) central; Arabic prevails over English
EU Regulations	Teleological and comparative interpretation across 24 official languages; CJEU rulings binding
Poland	Constitutional Tribunal doctrine; EU law primacy since accession

Failure modes

Error	Likely cause	Resolution
definition_chain_circular	Statute has circular definitions	Flag and note; trace as far as possible
cross_reference_broken	References to repealed provisions	Flag as "REPEALED — verify current equivalent"
applicability_unclear	Statute silent on scope	Apply ejusdem generis / in dubio mitius as appropriate
jurisdiction_mismatch	Fryc (civil law) methodology applied to common law statute	Note differences; statute interpretation rules differ

Related skills

• [[import-legal-risk-assessment-zacharie-laik]]
• [[import-contract-review-anthropic]]
• [[import-legal-simulation-patrick-munro]]
• [[kb-gdpr-data-protection]]
• [[import-legal-risk-assessment-anthropic]]