---
title: "Check conflicts before a client-facing tool is used on a new enquiry"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/check-conflicts-before-a-client-facing-tool-is-used-on-a-new-enquiry"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A43-JU20261022-16"
practice_area: "Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-22"
---

# Check conflicts before a client-facing tool is used on a new enquiry

> From the enquiry, list the names of the people and organisations mentioned so they can be searched in the conflict records. Do not say that there is no conflict.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/check-conflicts-before-a-client-facing-tool-is-used-on-a-new-enquiry  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-22

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the enquiry, list the names of the people and organisations mentioned so they can be searched in the conflict records. Do not say that there is no conflict. |
| What the lawyer must review | The lawyer runs the conflict check for current and former clients and decides whether the tool may be used on the enquiry. |
| Written for / versions | 1 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Search the names before the tool is used. The guidance treats the tool like any other service for current and former client conflicts.

- What the AI does: From the enquiry, list the names of the people and organisations mentioned so they can be searched in the conflict records. Do not say that there is no conflict.
- What the lawyer does: The lawyer runs the conflict check for current and former clients and decides whether the tool may be used on the enquiry.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Practical workflow informed by the linked primary sources; the traffic light and working checks are editorial guidance, not a court classification.
- Why: The level reflects what the work is, the consequence of an error, and how much of the output the lawyer must independently re-derive.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Queensland Law Society Guidance Statement No 37 says that, in the short and medium term, services supplied via a tool should be treated like any other service for current and former client conflict.
2. Conflict checks before legal work starts remain important.
3. The name list is not a clearance. The lawyer decides whether the tool may be used.
4. A new party in an existing matter is checked again.

## Notes

- These are suggested working checks. Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts; the checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Sources

- [Queensland Law Society, Guidance Statement No 37: Artificial intelligence in legal practice](https://www.qls.com.au/practising-law-in-qld/ethics/guidance-statements/no-37-artificial-intelligence-in-legal-practice) (checked 2026-10-22)

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [United States](https://ailawframework.com/obligations/client-facing-and-access-to-justice-ai-tools/check-conflicts-before-a-client-facing-tool-is-used-on-a-new-enquiry/united-states.md) | Yellow |

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*