Before you start
Understanding what you are working with
Read this once before your first session. It explains what Claude is, what this Project does, and the few rules you must follow every time you use it. After this, keep the Step-by-Step tab open while you draft.
Claude is an AI language model developed by Anthropic — the same category of tool as ChatGPT, but a different product trained differently. It reads what you give it and produces high-quality written output based on the information in that conversation.
The single most important thing to understand: Claude only knows what it has been given in that conversation. It does not browse the internet, access live databases, or remember anything from a previous session.
A Project is a persistent workspace inside Claude. Every time you open a new chat within this Project, the same instructions and knowledge files are automatically loaded — you do not paste anything or set anything up each time.
This Project: the drafter has already read your recommendation template, style guide, verified case authorities, and the Code of Good Practice before you sit down.
The knowledge files in this Project are the firm's own documents. Claude uses them as its source of truth — not generic legal knowledge from the internet.
The Higgs Recommendation Drafting Project has been configured specifically for this firm. It currently contains the following knowledge files:
- ✓Firm configuration file — team structure, escalation rules, and verified case authorities
- ✓Recommendation letter template — the firm's standard structure and format
- ✓House style guide — font, spacing, and document layout standards
- ✓Code of Good Practice: Dismissal (2025 version)
- ✓Nine anonymised case studies covering the firm's matter types
This means Claude knows how Higgs Attorneys drafts — not how a generic South African law firm drafts.
Every chat you open in this Project must be named before any drafting starts. Claude will ask you for four details at the start of every new chat and will construct the name for you to paste in.
Think of it like a physical file: Claude is the person managing the cabinet. If the file has no label, it cannot be found.
Chat titles are visible to everyone with access to this Project. Use initials or a matter reference number only — never the full name of the employee, complainant, or any other individual.
Claude is configured to pause and name a flag before continuing whenever certain conditions are present on the facts. This is intentional — not an error or malfunction. When Claude raises a flag, read it carefully and decide how to proceed before telling it to continue.
This Project is the first phase. The following will be added or connected once the current phase is tested and working with live matters:
How to draft a recommendation letter
Step-by-step workflow
Follow these steps in order every time you open a new chat in this Project. Each stage depends on your input from the previous one — do not skip ahead.
Before you open a new chat — have these ready
The matter type · The employee initials or matter reference number · Hearing notes or an evidence summary · The chairperson's findings per charge · Mitigating and aggravating factors you want addressed
When you open a new chat, Claude will ask you for four details before any drafting begins. Answer them in your first message or one by one.
- 1Matter type — e.g. Intoxication, Absenteeism, Theft, Insubordination
- 2Employee initials or matter reference number — never the full name
- 3Your attorney initials
- 4Today's date
Claude will output the formatted chat name. Click the pencil icon next to the chat title in the left-hand sidebar and paste it in before continuing.
If Claude raises a high-risk flag at this point, read it and decide how to proceed before moving on. See the Orientation tab for the full list of flags.
Tell Claude to begin Stage 1 and provide the hearing details. You can paste your hearing notes directly, describe the evidence in your own words, or summarise what each witness said.
Claude will produce a structured evidence summary in plain, professional language consistent with SA labour law practice. Review it before moving to Stage 2 — correct anything that does not accurately reflect the record.
Claude will ask for the chairperson's actual findings per charge. Provide them — Claude will not invent findings. It uses what you give it and drafts the legal justification around those specific findings.
Claude will draft each finding with specific references back to the evidence from Stage 1, stating whether the charge was proven on a balance of probabilities and citing the relevant testimony and exhibits.
If Claude draws on anything outside the firm's verified authority list, it will flag it explicitly for your independent verification before you proceed.
Tell Claude the recommended sanction and provide the mitigating and aggravating factors you want addressed. Claude will draft the motivation grounded in the Code of Good Practice: Dismissal and the firm's verified case authorities.
Claude will reference Sidumo and apply the matter-specific authorities from the firm's file — for example, Mthembu for intoxication matters, or Sappi Novoboard and Sylvania Metals for insubordination.
Tell Claude to assemble the complete Outcome Report and Recommendation. It will apply the firm's house style automatically: the hearing header block, numbered sections (no bullets), third person throughout, and the standard sign-off.
The output structure will follow the firm's template: Preliminary Matters → Evidence → Finding → Recommendation (framework → authorities → application → conclusion) → Sign-off.
Claude produces a strong first draft — it is not a final document. Review the output for factual accuracy, verify case references, and add any matter-specific detail that was not in the notes you provided.
Copy the output into Word, apply the firm's template, and issue in the normal way.
Other document types
This Project also supports employment contracts, legal opinions, and settlement letters. Tell Claude what you need and provide the relevant matter details — it will follow the firm's templates and house style from the knowledge files.
The justification must name a specific project, defined task, or objectively determinable date or event. Generic reasons such as "operational requirements" are not sufficient. Claude will ask for the specific detail before drafting if it has not been provided.
This Project is configured for South African labour law only. If a matter involves a non-SA jurisdiction or appears cross-border, do not proceed with Claude — escalate to Charlie Higgs directly.