The Bilingual Contract Review

Most contract review prompts are designed for English, so Arabic contracts get weaker analysis. You end up either translating the whole document first or missing nuances that only exist in the Arabic legal text.

That is the gap this drop closes. It is a finance & admin skill built for Claude, and it takes about ten minutes to set up the first time. After that it runs in under a minute.

Who should use it

Business owners and managers in the UAE who work with contracts in both Arabic and English

How it works

The skill file does five things, in this order.

1. Ask Claude which language to prioritize. Tell Claude whether the Arabic or English version is the governing text according to the contract itself.

2. Request a terminology check across both versions. Have Claude flag where key legal terms in Arabic don't match their English counterparts exactly.

3. Check for scope differences between versions. Ask Claude to identify obligations or rights that appear in one language version but not the other.

4. Get Arabic-specific legal concept warnings. Have Claude surface terms tied to Sharia law or local regulation that have no direct English equivalent.

5. Ask for a consistency map. Request a table showing which sections align across languages and which contain material differences.

What comes back

A structured report showing where the two language versions diverge and which version protects you better on specific terms

The mistake to avoid

Upload both versions as separate files rather than one combined PDF. Claude can then reference each version cleanly without confusion about which language it's reading.

Running it

Save this as SKILL.md inside a folder named after the skill, then drop the folder into your Claude Code skills directory or upload it to a Claude Project. Claude reads the frontmatter to decide when the skill applies, so keep the description line intact. For a one-off run, paste the prompt block directly.

Where this fits

On its own, one skill saves an hour a week. The compounding happens when three or four of them run in sequence on the same input, the same transcript that produces a scope of work also produces the follow-up email and the project brief. That is the point at which it stops being a prompt and starts being an internal tool. If you want that wired into the systems your team already uses, that is the work 67 Digital does.

In the file

You are reviewing a bilingual contract with versions in Arabic and English.

According to the contract header, the governing language version is: {governing_language}

Please perform the following analysis:

1. Identify which version is legally binding based on the conflict clause
2. Compare key commercial terms across both versions:
   - Payment amounts and currency
   - Delivery dates and milestones
   - Liability caps and limitations
   - Termination rights and notice periods
   - Dispute resolution venue and governing law

3. Flag terminology mismatches where:
   - The Arabic term has a broader or narrower scope than the English
   - Legal concepts exist in one language but not the other
   - Translation choices change the legal meaning

4. Highlight clauses that appear in one version but are missing or substantially different in the other

5. Note any Arabic legal terms rooted in Sharia or GCC regulations that may not translate directly

6. Provide a consistency table with three columns: Section, Arabic Version Summary, English Version Summary

7. Recommend which version I should rely on for each major obligation

Format your response with clear headings and flag high-risk discrepancies first.