Conflict clearance

Conflict clearance is a decision about a specific matter and counterparty. The Matter Coordinator prepares the relevant names and evidence. The Supervising Attorney decides whether the case is clear, conflicted or needs more information. The Matter Coordinator records the reviewer, date, decision and evidence on the conflict review. Those outcomes have different operational meanings. More information is a request to investigate, while a conflict is a reason to stop engagement.

The decision belongs with the matter so a later reader can see the basis for continuing or declining. An empty or ambiguous note should not be treated as a clearance. The team can inspect the reviewer and supporting evidence before it advances a case into engagement. A failed guarded action also leaves an operation receipt, giving the team a visible reason to investigate rather than silently changing the matter.

• Review record. Keep the reviewer, date, decision and evidence together on the matter.
• Matter state. Use the conflict review stage to distinguish a pending decision from engagement.
• Outcome trace. Inspect the operation receipt when an attempted change was held or failed.

Agree the minimum evidence a reviewer needs for common matter types. The team may need party names, an engagement scope and a client identifier before it can decide. Establish who may enter the review record and who may advance the matter after a clear result. The app should show the distinction between preparing a review and making the legal decision.

Decide how to handle a later correction to a party name. The review evidence should remain attributable to its original decision. A change to the counterparty or scope calls for another check under the organization’s rules, not a quiet rewrite of the old decision. Auditors need to see the matter and the supporting review without gaining edit access to the legal conclusion.

A coordinator receives a new contract matter for a familiar organization but a new counterparty. The attorney reviews the party and records that more information is needed. The matter stays in conflict review while the coordinator verifies the counterparty identity. When the attorney later records a clear decision with evidence, the coordinator can add the engagement reference. The reviewer can distinguish the earlier question from the later clearance.

Repeat the exercise with a conflict decision. The matter is declined, and the review record remains available for inspection. If an action fails, inspect its operation receipt rather than assuming that an attempted transition completed. This gives the attorney and coordinator a shared account of the decision.

• Conflict review queue — Find matters awaiting a clearance decision.
• Matter intake — Trace the case back to its original owner and counterparty.

Follow matter opening and inspect the data model.