Editorial policy

What we publish

Two kinds of content, kept visibly apart. Statutory text is reproduced only from official sources and is never paraphrased inside the official-text box. Explanations are our own writing: plain-language summaries, worked examples, key points, common mistakes and answers to questions people search for.

How we write

• Short sentences, active voice, ordinary words. We aim at roughly a Class 8–10 reading level without dumbing down the substance.
• One concept at a time. A legal term is defined the first time it appears and linked to the glossary.
• Indian scenarios, always fictional, always labelled as illustrations.
• We distinguish a legal requirement from a practical suggestion, and we say which is which.
• We never promise that an application will be granted, and we never describe a preliminary view as a conclusion.
• Every provision gets its own writing. We do not template explanations across provisions to fill pages.

What we refuse to publish

• Fee amounts. They change by notification and depend on facts a web page cannot know.
• Invented deadlines. Where we are not certain of a period, we describe the requirement and tell you to check the Rules in force rather than printing a number.
• Form numbers we are not sure of. The form finder lists the forms in everyday use, not a guessed full schedule.
• Testimonials, case studies or client names that we cannot evidence and are not authorised to publish.
• Advice on your matter. General explanation is free; an opinion you can rely on requires an engagement.

Where AI fits

Drafting assistance is used in preparing explanations. No explanation is published on the strength of that alone. Every substantive explanation enters a review queue and is checked by a qualified reviewer before it is treated as verified — see the legal review policy, which also tells you honestly what is still pending.

Corrections

We would rather be corrected than be wrong. See the corrections policy.