---
title: "Build a class-action viability memo against the s 33C FCA Act threshold"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/build-a-viability-memo-cause-of-action-class-size-and-common-questions/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A7-T1-R1-CTH"
practice_area: "Class Actions / Representative Proceedings"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# 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.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/build-a-viability-memo-cause-of-action-class-size-and-common-questions/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Class Actions / Representative Proceedings](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | 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. |
| What the lawyer must review | Keep the output internal until re-derived Verify every authority and the s 33C(1)(a)–(c) elements (or state equivalent) Check limitation, s 33ZE suspension and tolling Test the common questions For securities claims, apply the s 674/674A version in force at the time (pre- or post-May 2021) |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Build a viability memo: cause of action, class size and common questions](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/build-a-viability-memo-cause-of-action-class-size-and-common-questions.md) |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Trace relied-on content to independent sources and check for relevant material the output has missed.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes organising research leads and preparing preliminary structure or wording. Confirm the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Open each relied-on authority independently. Confirm its existence, current status, proposition and any quotation or pinpoint reference.
2. Trace every relied-on figure to its source, confirm dates and assumptions, and independently recalculate totals or derived amounts.
3. Calculate operative dates independently from the current rule and actual triggering event. Check exceptions and record the verified deadline.
4. Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
5. Check the specialist’s assumptions, qualifications and limits. Obtain the relevant expert or specialist review before relying on a technical conclusion.
6. Review the original source set for relevant material absent from the output, including contrary evidence, qualifications and unresolved gaps.
7. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
8. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
9. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

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