Law firms
Investigations and disputes teams whose matter turns on Iranian evidence or a Farsi-speaking subject.
When a matter turns on an Iranian document, a Persian-language claim, or a subject who operates in Farsi, most teams are working blind. I close that gap: I locate the primary sources, test them, and set out what the record supports — and what it does not.
Investigations and disputes teams whose matter turns on Iranian evidence or a Farsi-speaking subject.
Units that need Persian-language sources read accurately before a decision is taken.
Advisories with Iran or MENA exposure that need a Persian-language capability they don't hold in-house.
Every material finding is traced to a primary source and archived on first access. Sources are graded for reliability and credibility. I separate fact from reported claim, identify where sources conflict, state my assessment and my confidence in it — graded High, Moderate or Low — and specify what evidence would change the view. Persian names are given in the original with Latin variants; dates in both the Iranian and Gregorian calendars. What you receive is a clear line between what is established, what is alleged, and what is my judgement — with the basis for each.
Partial loading resumes; commercial normalisation is not established — a mid-conflict read of Iranian oil loading and Strait transit, from the public record.
Separating the corporate and enforcement record — two distinct entities, and what the 2005–2010 Iran aircraft-export case does and does not establish about each.
Both are illustrative samples, prepared on public sources only — no confidential, client or human sources. Live client work is never reproduced here.
If a request falls outside this, I'll say so — and, where possible, offer the part that is in scope.
Tell me the question and the deadline. I'll confirm the right format, the scope and the fee before any work begins.
Start a conversation →