Module · Conflicts · Module

Conflicts you see —before they become conflicts.

Optimaite Law screens — in under 3 seconds — every active, archived and potential matter against the new client, the opponent, their directors, group structure and member relationships. You see hits with reasoning — and decide with BRAO-compliant documentation.

AI screens direct and transitive conflicts (group, identical directors, shareholder chains) in seconds.

Request demo Compliance & Security

GDPR compliant
§43e BRAO compliant
Native beA integration
§203 StGB compliant
On-premise available
Cloud in Germany
Solo to large firms

Compared

Optimaite conflict check vs. RA-MICRO conflict module

Search type

Optimaite Law

Fuzzy + semantic

RA-MICRO Konflikt

Exact string

Group tracing

Optimaite Law

Up to 3+ levels

RA-MICRO Konflikt

None

Director match

Optimaite Law

Automatic via HRB

RA-MICRO Konflikt

Manually maintained

Speed (50k matters)

Optimaite Law

<3 sec

RA-MICRO Konflikt

20-60 sec or more

Audit doc

Optimaite Law

Auto-PDF with reasoning

RA-MICRO Konflikt

Manual note

AI in the background

How conflict checking runs in Optimaite

Four layers: direct match, identical directors, group affiliation, transitive shareholdings.

01
What the AI does
AI extracts from the mandate inquiry all parties: client, opponent, directors, ultimate beneficial owners (UBO), intervenors.
What you decide
You see the participant graph — add or exclude persons.
02
What the AI does
Layer 1: AI does direct name matching across all matters — fuzzy for spelling variants ('Müller' = 'Mueller'), commercial register, VAT ID.
→ M-2023-0091 — Müller GmbH = Mueller GmbH (HRB 67342)
What you decide
Hits are color-coded: red (same party), yellow (related person), green (no conflict).
03
What the AI does
Layer 2: AI checks director identity — if 'Hans Müller' is director at client A and opponent B, that's a conflict.
What you decide
Data comes from commercial register extracts or your KYC process — AI connects the dots.
04
What the AI does
Layer 3: AI traces group affiliation — parent/subsidiary/sub-subsidiary, including holdings and trust structures.
What you decide
You see the group tree with conflict nodes marked — decide on acceptance with reasoning.
05
What the AI does
Layer 4: Transitive shareholdings — 'client A owns 30% of X, opponent B owns 25% of X' — AI flags for review.
What you decide
You weigh: no direct conflict, but reject mandate or disclose to client? Decision is saved with reasoning.
06
What the AI does
AI documents the decision: who checked (lawyer ID), when (timestamp), which conflicts (hit list), how decided (acceptance/rejection with reasoning), what client disclosure occurred.
What you decide
For bar-association queries the documentation is printed in 30 seconds — BRAO-compliant.

Lawyer in control. The conflict engine doesn't replace legal judgment — it provides the data basis. Every mandate acceptance remains a conscious lawyer decision; the system only documents.

Built in, not bolted on

Four building blocks in operational interplay.

01 · Feature

Fuzzy name matching

Recognizes 'Müller' = 'Mueller', 'GmbH' = 'limited liability company', tolerates typos and language variants.

02 · Feature

Commercial register integration

Direct query against the German commercial register (HRB/HRA) — directors, proxies, shareholders, partners are auto-imported.

03 · Feature

Group relations visualised

Group trees as interactive graph. Conflict nodes marked; depth configurable (typically 3 levels).

04 · Feature

UBO detection

Ultimate beneficial owners from trust and holding structures are detected — relevant for AML compliance (GwG).

Whitelist / blacklist

Specific clients or opponents can be explicitly blocked or released for mandates — beyond matter lifetime.

Audit log with reasoning

Every conflict check, decision and client disclosure is documented. Export as PDF for bar association or insurance.

The status quo

Today this costs time. Not anymore with Optimaite.

Without Optimaite

String match misses many

Legacy conflict checks search 'Müller GmbH' and miss 'Müller Beteiligungs AG' (same director) or 'Mueller Holding' (group parent). That's exactly where professional-liability cases arise.

With Optimaite Law

AI extracts from the mandate inquiry all parties: client, opponent, directors, ultimate beneficial owners (UBO), intervenors.

Without Optimaite

Conflict documentation on paper

When the bar association asks 'When was the conflict checked, who decided?' — the answer sits in an email in the archive. At best.

With Optimaite Law

Layer 1: AI does direct name matching across all matters — fuzzy for spelling variants ('Müller' = 'Mueller'), commercial register, VAT ID.

→ M-2023-0091 — Müller GmbH = Mueller GmbH (HRB 67342)

Without Optimaite

Large-firm reality: 50,000 matters

With 50,000+ active matters and 200 lawyers, conflict checking isn't 'someone looks it up' — it's a systematic bottleneck.

With Optimaite Law

Layer 2: AI checks director identity — if 'Hans Müller' is director at client A and opponent B, that's a conflict.

FAQ

Frequently asked

Default is 3 levels (parent → subsidiary → sub-sub), extensible to 6. Beyond 6 levels, hits are flagged for manual review — the typical large-firm setup.

Yes. Optimaite has connectors for Bundesanzeiger, OpenCorporates, Northdata and the Transparency Register. For regulated-industry mandates (banks, pharma) we also integrate BaFin sanctions lists and the EU consolidated list.

§43a (4) BRAO and §3 BORA are the basis. Optimaite doesn't flag 'this is a conflict' — but 'this is a potential conflict, check this relationship'. The legal classification stays with the lawyer.

Plays well with

Related modules

See conflicts before others do.

30-minute demo: we screen one of your hypothetical new mandates against your existing book and show the four conflict layers in action.

Request demo Compliance & Security

14-day trial · no credit card · data residency: Frankfurt