Kosuke127 (asker) Feb 14, 2015:

Thank you for your inputs! I think at the end, "adversarial conflict" in this context should simply mean 紛争 as cinefil suggested. I appreciate your discussion and the links you offered!

Port City Feb 14, 2015:

I'm not quite convinced of what you stated, but thank you for your input, anyway. The "services" seems to be the services the company provides as their trade, but I don't need to discuss this.

By the way, in order to say "disagreement" with no likelihood of reconciliation, 対立 or 紛争 alone is good enough, because that' what 対立・紛争 are at least until they come to a time of seeking reconciliation.

David Gibney Feb 13, 2015:

"Adversarial conflicts" is not the same as a "conflict of interest". Adversarial relates to two or more parties (adversaries). A conflict of interest refers to one party (We), where that party could profit at the expense of their clients so may not represent their clients interests. The "services" noted are provided for "adversarial conflicts".

Port City Feb 11, 2015:

(This isn't necessarily in response to David's comment.) In the source text, "adversarial conflicts" appears as a definition of what precedes it. That means it refers to "a conflict of interest in respect of matters to which the Services are specifically and directly related", I think, unless it covers a wider area not quoted in the question.

Since it is something to be "identified", I don't think it refers to litigation. For reference, below is New Zealand government's policy on identifying and managing 'conflict of interest'. In 1.12, litigation is referred to as the worst consequence of poor management of conflict of interest: "Managing conflicts of interest well is not only good practice, but it also protects the public entity and the member or official involved. A conflict of interest that is hidden, or that is poorly managed, creates a risk of allegations or perceptions of misconduct, or of other adverse consequences such as litigation."
http://www.oag.govt.nz/2007/conflicts-public-entities/docs/o...

David Gibney Feb 11, 2015:

One way to look at it is the contrasting "non-adversarial conflict resolution" where the two parties work together co-operating and compromising to resolve the disagreement