Advise on joining a person to a proceeding
Key facts
- Human involvement
- RedLawyer-led
- How AI is used
- From the instructions, record who would be joined, whether they would be an applicant or another party, which paragraph of rule 9.05(1) is proposed, and whether that person consents. Do not decide that joinder is necessary and do not draft the application.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer decides whether rule 9.05 is met and writes the application. A person must not be added as an applicant without that person's consent. If an order is made, the proceeding starts for that person on the date of the order.
- Written for / version
- US
Open a jurisdiction version of this task to see which instruments apply: US
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Supporting preparation only. From the instructions, record who would be joined, whether they would be an applicant or another party, which paragraph of rule 9.05(1) is proposed, and whether that person consents. Do not decide that joinder is necessary and do not draft the application. The tool writes nothing into the document. Substantive advice, judgement and any restricted content remain with the responsible human. |
| Lawyer | Perform the substantive analysis and decisions. Independently check any permitted supporting work and approve the exact output for its intended use. |
Checklist
- Match the reason for joinder to a paragraph of rule 9.05(1).
- If the person would be an applicant, confirm consent is on the file before the application is treated as ready.
- Confirm the advice states that the proceeding starts for that person on the date of the order, which is rule 9.05(3).
- Confirm the tool has not drafted the application.
Sources
- Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth) r 9.05 · 2026-10-22
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.