---
title: "Compare one injured person's scheme position with a standalone claim"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-one-injured-person-s-scheme-position-with-a-standalone-claim"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A7-PR20261023-2"
practice_area: "Class Actions / Representative Proceedings"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Compare one injured person's scheme position with a standalone claim

> Set the approved scheme's categories beside the injury, treatment and wage figures the lawyer has accepted for this one person, and list what a Part 3-5 assessment would have to confront under the sections the lawyer…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-one-injured-person-s-scheme-position-with-a-standalone-claim  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-25

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 | Set the approved scheme's categories beside the injury, treatment and wage figures the lawyer has accepted for this one person, and list what a Part 3-5 assessment would have to confront under the sections the lawyer names. Do not value either path and do not advise the person to leave the proceeding. |
| What the lawyer must review | Write the comparison. Measure the scheme and a standalone claim on the same heads of loss. Do not prefer a path because a published cap looks lower or higher. Read the regime that applies. This is not the separate task of advising on opting out. The lawyer owns any advice about leaving the proceeding. Keep health and wage records in a firm-controlled tool. |
| Written for / versions | 3 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer-led judgement**

The lawyer writes the comparison and any advice that follows from it.

- What the AI does: Set the approved scheme's categories beside the injury, treatment and wage figures the lawyer has accepted for this one person, and list what a Part 3-5 assessment would have to confront under the sections the lawyer names. Do not value either path and do not advise the person to leave the proceeding.
- What the lawyer does: Write the comparison. Measure the scheme and a standalone claim on the same heads of loss. Do not prefer a path because a published cap looks lower or higher. Read the regime that applies. This is not the separate task of advising on opting out. The lawyer owns any advice about leaving the proceeding. Keep health and wage records in a firm-controlled tool.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 23 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance. The Commonwealth text opened was the AustLII consolidation.
- Why: The level reflects what the work is, the consequence of an error, and how much of the output the lawyer must independently re-derive.
- Restriction: The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Use the scheme categories in the approved scheme, not a generic loss list.
2. Put Part VIB on the standalone Part 3-5 side only. Do not apply s 28LE, s 16 or the Queensland injury scale to that side.
3. Show any Victoria group-costs percentage as its own line. Do not invent an equivalent percentage in Queensland or New South Wales.
4. Do not draft an opt-out notice or advise the person to opt out in this task.

## Notes

- These are suggested working checks. Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts; the checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

## Sources

- [Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth), ss 87E, 87S, 87M and 87U](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/caca2010265/s87e.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Supreme Court Act 1986 (Vic), s 33ZDA and s 33V](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/sca1986183/s33zda.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Proceedings Act 2011 (Qld), s 103R](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cpa2011175/s103r.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Procedure Act 2005 (NSW), s 173](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa2005167/s173.html) (checked 2026-10-23)

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [New South Wales](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-one-injured-person-s-scheme-position-with-a-standalone-claim/new-south-wales.md) | Red |
| [Victoria](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-one-injured-person-s-scheme-position-with-a-standalone-claim/victoria.md) | Red |
| [Queensland](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-one-injured-person-s-scheme-position-with-a-standalone-claim/queensland.md) | Red |

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