Practice area
Class Actions / Representative ProceedingsRepresentative proceedings (High Court Rules 2016)Class actions
Define the intended work in Class Actions / Representative Proceedings, confirm the applicable requirements and select a task to plan the necessary review.
Key facts
- Tasks covered
- 15
- Tasks with a step-by-step checklist
- 4
- Local differences
- 3 jurisdictions where this area changes
Jurisdiction
Tasks
GreenLawyer reviewYellowClose supervisionRedLawyer-led
| Task | How AI is used | Human involvement | What the lawyer must review |
|---|---|---|---|
| Build a viability memo: cause of action, class size and common questions | From the facts brief and sample documents, table possible claims, class-size inputs and candidate common questions, with a list of facts still needed. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Build a class-action viability memo against the s 33C FCA Act threshold | From the facts brief and samples, table possible claims, class-size inputs against the s 33C seven-member threshold and candidate common questions, with facts needed. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Draft the group or class definition from the claim theory | Draft alternative class definitions (included, excluded, class period) mapped to the pleaded claims, and list over- and under-inclusion risks. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Run a first-pass review of the large discovery set | From a lawyer-cleared corpus, cluster documents, flag likely hot families and draft an issues list with sample cites. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Run a first-pass TAR review of the class-action discovery set under GPN-AI | From a lawyer-cleared corpus, cluster documents, flag hot families and draft privilege-log entries and an issues list. Lists must conform to FCR rr 20.14–20.17 (GPN-AI). | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Run class-action TAR inside a closed environment under FRCP 26 | Propose review batches and issue codes from a protocol the lawyer has already approved. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Draft class notices: opt-out, registration and settlement | Check the lawyer's draft notice against the court's notice orders or, before they are made, the orders sought and the court's sample notices, the class definition and, for a settlement notice, the deed and the distribution scheme, and list each required element — including who is a group member in the terms of the pleaded class definition, the opt-out date and how to opt out, that a group member who does not opt out will be bound by the judgment or approved settlement and cannot bring their own claim, the registration deadline and the consequence of not registering, the effect of the settlement on group members' rights and the release, how and by when to object, funding and deduction statements, and contact points — as present, missing or inconsistent with its source. List the notice steps the orders require, then check them against the methods, recipient lists and dates actually proposed — post, email, advertisement, website, market announcement — and set out each required step beside the step proposed, flagging any gap. | RedLawyer-led | The lawyer writes the notice. Notice content and method are court-controlled: work from the sealed orders as made rather than a draft, confirm that the opt-out date, the registration deadline, the stated consequence of not registering, the binding effect on a group member who does not opt out and, in a settlement notice, the release and the objection date match the orders, the class definition and the deed, and do not give notice until the court has approved it where approval is required. |
| Model a settlement distribution scheme from the class data | From lawyer-supplied class data and the settlement heads, draft a distribution-scheme outline (eligibility, proof, tranches) and an issues list of data gaps. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Compare competing class proceedings and draft the carriage or consolidation note | Compare competing filings on group definition, funding, lead plaintiff and proposed orders, and draft a carriage or consolidation note with document cites. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Compare competing class actions and draft the GPN-CA carriage or consolidation note | Compare competing filings on group definition, funding, lead plaintiff and proposed orders, and draft a carriage or consolidation note with cites. Re-derive every fact before filing. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Compile the court book and a hearing chronology | Draft a bundle index and dated chronology from the pleaded case and key exhibits, and list missing documents. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Draft the representative plaintiff's affidavit from the proof | The tool writes no part of the affidavit — no draft, no paragraph, no heading, no jurat or annexure wording. Before the lawyer drafts, the tool may build a strictly tabular, source-tagged table of the representative's dealings, acquisitions and losses by date, each row set beside the source document it comes from and drawn from the source documents rather than the proofing note or anything the representative said; it is a table of documents, not an outline or a paragraph order for the affidavit. Once the lawyer has drafted, index the exhibits against the lawyer's draft, compare each paragraph against the proofing note and the source documents, and list every assertion with no source. Check the affidavit's form against the court's affidavit rules and the class actions practice note. | RedLawyer-led | The lawyer drafts the affidavit from the proof and the representative swears only their own words, checked back to what the representative actually said, with opinion and submission kept out. Adequacy of representation is a legal issue decided on the evidence and the group definition, not a drafting issue. |
| Draft expert instructions and review the draft class-action report | Organise the common questions, the class definition and the assumed facts the lawyer has settled into a schedule that sets the pleaded common question, the source document and the assumed fact beside each, and list the material the expert has not yet been given. On the returned draft, table each assumption, the sample frame and each opinion against the common question it answers, flagging every assumption with no source in the brief, every sample criterion that does not match the class definition, and every question in the letter the report does not answer. The lawyer writes the letter of instruction; the tool writes nothing into it and nothing into the expert's report. | RedLawyer-led | The lawyer writes the letter of instruction and settles every question and assumed fact in it, confirming each is supported by the pleaded common questions and by provable evidence. Check that the expert's sample and methodology match the class definition and not merely the pleading, and remember that a determination on a common question binds group members who never saw the letter. The instructions are disclosable with the report; the expert's duty is to the court and the opinion stays the expert's own, and disclose any AI use in preparing material that informed it where the court's practice note requires. |
| Draft the representative pleading from the facts-and-issues brief | Organise the facts-and-issues brief into a table that records beside each fact the source document and whether the brief puts the fact as shared across the group or as personal to the representative, and that sets each common question the lawyer has identified against the facts the brief itself puts forward as supporting it. Then compare the pleading the lawyer has drafted against that table, the court's rules for representative proceedings and its class actions practice note, and list every allegation with no source and every departure from the pleading rules; the tool writes no part of the pleading. | RedLawyer-led | The lawyer drafts and settles the pleading, including the group description and the common questions. The group description as filed fixes who is bound by the judgment and whose limitation period is suspended: anyone left outside it keeps running down their own time, and amending the group later cannot be assumed to give that time back. The lawyer must be able to give the proper-basis and reasonable-prospects certification required in the court where the proceeding is filed, for every allegation, and every pleaded common question needs an evidentiary foundation rather than only a place in the brief. |
| Draft the settlement-approval affidavit and submissions | Index the settlement deed, distribution scheme and the funding, costs and commission material as exhibits, and table every settlement sum, deduction, fee and litigation-history date beside the source document it comes from. Against the approval affidavit and submissions the lawyer has written, list each assertion with no source on the file and flag form departures from the court's settlement-approval rules and class actions practice note; the tool writes no part of the affidavit, and in this task it writes no part of the submissions either, because the approval submissions restate the sworn material and the tier follows the most restrictive component of the task. That is a confinement of this task, not a general rule about submissions. | RedLawyer-led | Settlement approval binds the class. The lawyer writes the affidavit and the submissions, and the deponent adopts the evidence as their own knowledge. Rebuild every sum, fee, commission and risk statement from the file, and confirm the court's current approval rules before filing. |
| Draft the settlement-approval affidavit and s 33V(1) submissions | Index the settlement deed, distribution scheme and the funding, costs and commission material as exhibits, and table every settlement sum, deduction, fee and litigation-history date beside the source document it comes from, flagging figures to source-check. The tool writes no part of the s 33V(1) affidavit and, in this task, no part of the submissions either, because the approval submissions restate the sworn material — no draft, no scaffold, no suggested paragraphs. Against the affidavit and the submissions the lawyer has written, list each assertion with no source on the file. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Prepare settlement-approval materials for a New Zealand representative proceeding | Summarise the proposed settlement and the group definition from the file. | RedLawyer-led |
|
| Draft group-member updates and registration communications | From the current orders and the registration process, draft member-update text and a FAQ, with a list of personal data fields that must not go into the tool. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Draft a funder or client risk memo from the case file | From the pleaded case and budget inputs, draft an internal risk memo structure (liability theory, remaining steps, budget risks) with source flags. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Reconcile group-member data to the class definition | Compare the registration or client list with the class definition and produce inclusion/exclusion flags, duplicates and missing proof fields. | YellowClose supervision |
|
| Prepare a first-pass loss-methodology issues list from sample files | From a sample of member files and the expert's outline, list data fields needed for loss, gaps and inconsistent recording. | YellowClose supervision |
|
Firm-wide obligations
| Obligation | What it covers |
|---|---|
| Trust accounting & handling client money | Checks that apply across files. |
| Costs, billing & litigation funding | Checks that apply across files. |
| Client-facing & access-to-justice AI tools | Checks that apply across files. |
| Incoming evidence — deepfakes & synthetic documents | Checks that apply across files. |
| AI decision systems | Checks that apply across files. |
| Confidentiality & client information | Checks that apply across files. |
| AML/CTF — the practice as a reporting entity | Checks that apply across files. |
What changes in Australia
| Topic | What changes |
|---|---|
| Law | Part IVA Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth); Pt 10 Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic); Pt 10 CPA (NSW); Part 9A District Court Act 1973 (NSW). |
| Class-wide risk | A wrong authority, group definition or limitation date can extinguish the rights of the whole class, with no individual recovery. |
| Group-member data | Large volumes of confidential member data. Informal AI use in review, communications and loss modelling can bypass the firm's controls. |
| Court control | Notices and settlements need court approval, and outcomes bind people who never instructed a lawyer. |
| GPN-AI | Federal Court GPN-AI (16 April 2026) imposes disclosure and verification duties. Filing unverified AI output exposes the responsible lawyer to personal adverse costs orders. |
What changes in New Zealand
Known here as: Representative proceedings (High Court Rules 2016)
| Topic | What changes |
|---|---|
| Procedure | No dedicated class-actions statute like Part IVA of the Federal Court of Australia Act. Group claims run as representative proceedings under the High Court Rules 2016. |
| Reform | The Law Commission has a class-actions and litigation-funding project. It is reform work, not the current rule. |
| Not Australian law | Do not cite s 33C or s 33V. |
| Limits on AI assistance |
|
- High Court Rules 2016 · 2026-09-23
- Law Commission: class actions and litigation funding · 2026-09-23
- Courts of New Zealand: GenAI guidelines — Lawyers (7 December 2023) · 2026-09-23
What changes in United States
Known here as: Class actions
| Topic | What changes |
|---|---|
| What changes | Federal class actions are FRCP 23, not Part IVA. State class procedures vary. |
| Filings | Rule 11 and any generative-AI standing order apply to every filing, including class-certification briefs. |
| Review at scale | TAR is a Rule 26 proportionality and protective-order question. Keep produced material out of public tools. |
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 · 2026-09-23
- Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 · 2026-09-23
- ABA Formal Opinion 512, Generative Artificial Intelligence Tools (29 July 2024) · 2026-09-23
Precedents for this area
- Opt-out notice, notice distribution plan and settlement-notice checklist (Federal Court class action) (Court document, AI use Red). An original plain-language opt-out notice for court approval, a distribution plan and draft orders for the giving of notice, and a checklist of what a settlement notice must cover, all keyed to Part IVA and the Class Actions Practice Note.
- Litigation funding agreement and costs review checklist (including common fund orders and Victorian group costs orders) (Checklist, AI use Yellow). A checklist for reviewing a class action litigation funding agreement and costs agreement: commission and fees, control, conflicts, security and adverse costs, disclosure to group members and the court, common fund orders after Kain, and Victorian group costs orders.
- Settlement distribution scheme (with safeguards for technology-assisted claims assessment) (Other, AI use Red). An original settlement distribution scheme for court approval: administrator, settlement fund, approved deductions, registration and eligibility, loss assessment, review rights, distribution, reporting, and safeguards where software or AI helps assess claims.
- Periodic update letter to group members (clients and registered group members) (Letter, AI use Yellow). A plain-English periodic update to group members covering what has happened, what comes next, costs and funding changes, dates and actions, privacy and scam warnings, with variants for clients of the firm and for non-client group members.
- Group member registration and intake protocol (including AI triage of registrations) (Policy, AI use Yellow). An internal protocol for registering and triaging large numbers of group members with AI assistance: approved tools, data minimisation, triage flags, mandatory human review, communications rules, privacy notices including automated-decision transparency, and quality checks.
- Prompt template with guardrails: reconciling registrations to the class definition (AI prompt, AI use Yellow). A guarded prompt for an approved, closed AI tool to compare pseudonymised registration records with the pleaded class definition and output a flag table with reasons, without deciding eligibility.
All precedents for Class Actions / Representative Proceedings. Signed-in accounts can read the full text.