Automating processes in a law firm
Mandate enquiries, deadlines and files — without client data leaving the firm.
Does this sound familiar?
The firm works well, but every mandate enquiry goes through the same steps: read the enquiry, run a conflict check, schedule the first consultation, open the mandate, set up the file. At five enquiries a day, that is half a position.
- Mandate enquiries come by phone, email, form and portals and are recorded several times
- The conflict check is run by hand against the file index
- Deadlines are in the calendar, but what triggers them is in emails
- Incoming post is scanned but not automatically assigned to the file
- Clients ask about the status because they have no access
What we actually do
Capture mandate enquiries in a structured way
A form that asks cleanly for area of law, opposing party and facts, instead of free text by email. The details go straight into the practice software in structured form.
Prepare the conflict check
Names of the opposing party are automatically checked against existing records and a result is presented. The decision stays with the lawyer — that is professional practice, not data processing.
Assign incoming post to the file
Incoming letters are read, assigned to the file number and filed. Documents that trigger deadlines are recognised and presented for review.
Status without a call back
A client portal that shows the status noticeably reduces status calls — without anyone having to release anything that hasn’t been approved.
Starting point
Automation after process analysis
From enquiry to an opened mandate
This is how the process runs today — and this chain is exactly where automation comes in.
- Enquiry via form or email
- Capture area of law and facts in a structured way
- Conflict check against existing records
- Lawyer decides whether to accept
- Open mandate and file
- Send power of attorney and engagement terms
- Schedule first consultation
Systems typically used here
This is the existing landscape an automation connects to. Listed is what is widespread in this industry — it says nothing about which system you use.
- RA-MICRO, AnNoText, Advoware or NoRA
- beA for electronic legal communication
- Document management linked to files
- Deadline calendar with advance deadlines
- Microsoft 365 or your own Exchange
What matters most here
Confidentiality is a criminal matter
Section 203 of the German Criminal Code also applies to technical service providers. A language model that processes mandate content must be integrated contractually and technically so that no content flows out for training purposes — or it is not used for that step at all. In practice, pre-qualification therefore often runs on rules rather than a model, and the model is only used where no mandate data is involved.
Frequently asked questions
May mandate data run through an AI at all?
Only under conditions that must be clarified beforehand: a data processing agreement, no use of the content for training, processing in the EU. In many firms the pragmatic answer is still not to send the core of the file through a model at all and instead to automate the processes around it — incoming post, deadlines, scheduling.
What about beA?
The beA mailbox is a closed system and is not bypassed. What is automated is what happens before and after beA: assigning to the file, recording deadlines, follow-ups.
Does this replace firm staff?
No. It takes away double entry. The decisions — accepting the mandate, calculating deadlines, legal assessment — stay where they belong.
Shall we look at your business?
The visibility check shows where you stand in a few seconds. Free, no sign-up.
Check your websiteWorking in Wiesbaden, Mainz, Frankfurt am Main, Rheingau-Taunus-Kreis.
Other industries