---
title: "Compare competing class actions and draft the GPN-CA carriage or consolidation note"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-competing-class-proceedings-and-draft-the-carriage-or-consolidat/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A7-T1-R6-CTH"
practice_area: "Class Actions / Representative Proceedings"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# 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.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-competing-class-proceedings-and-draft-the-carriage-or-consolidat/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 | 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. |
| What the lawyer must review | Use current filed versions Apply current GPN-CA and case law on group members' interests Apply the court's protocol (the joint Federal Court–Victorian Supreme Court protocol differs) Check statements about rival funding Include GPN-AI disclosure |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Compare competing class proceedings and draft the carriage or consolidation note](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-competing-class-proceedings-and-draft-the-carriage-or-consolidat.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 summarising source material and identifying points for review. 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. Check the current court or regulator requirements, prescribed form and attachments for the intended document and filing.
3. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
4. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
5. 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.*