---
title: "Audit a standard-form contract for unfair terms under ACL ss 23–28"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/competition-and-consumer-law/audit-a-standard-form-contract-for-one-sided-terms/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A29-T1-R6-CTH"
practice_area: "Competition & Consumer Law (ACCC / ACL)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Audit a standard-form contract for unfair terms under ACL ss 23–28

> Flag clauses that may fail the three-limb UCT test (significant imbalance, not reasonably necessary, detriment) and produce a suggested mark-up with risk ratings.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/competition-and-consumer-law/audit-a-standard-form-contract-for-one-sided-terms/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Competition & Consumer Law (ACCC / ACL)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/competition-and-consumer-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Flag clauses that may fail the three-limb UCT test (significant imbalance, not reasonably necessary, detriment) and produce a suggested mark-up with risk ratings. |
| What the lawyer must review | Remember unfair terms are illegal since 9 November 2023; up to $100m per term from 28 March 2026 Confirm standard form Confirm consumer or small business (under 100 staff or $10m turnover; no contract cap) Test each flag, especially 'reasonably necessary' Check ACCC enforcement |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Audit a standard-form contract for one-sided terms](https://ailawframework.com/practice/competition-and-consumer-law/audit-a-standard-form-contract-for-one-sided-terms.md) |

## Checking plan

**Lawyer review required**

The responsible lawyer reviews the work against the instructions, sources and intended use.

- What the AI does: Potential support includes preparing preliminary structure or wording 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. Review operative clauses in the complete document, including definitions, cross-references, schedules and inconsistencies with the instructions.
2. Obtain and inspect the relevant current official register or search result. Confirm identities, interests and the date and scope of the search.
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.*