---
title: "Build an allegation chronology from permitted documents"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/employment-and-workplace-relations/build-an-allegation-chronology-from-permitted-documents"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A49-R20260922-1"
practice_area: "Employment & Workplace Relations (incl. WHS)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Build an allegation chronology from permitted documents

> Extract dates, senders and document titles into a chronology limited to the allegations the investigator has listed.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/employment-and-workplace-relations/build-an-allegation-chronology-from-permitted-documents  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Employment & Workplace Relations (incl. WHS)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/employment-and-workplace-relations.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Extract dates, senders and document titles into a chronology limited to the allegations the investigator has listed. |
| What the lawyer must review | Verify the date, the people and the document Do not let the chronology become a narrative of what happened |
| Written for / versions | — |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

The chronology is a map of the file. It does not add events or say what they mean.

- What the AI does: Extract dates, senders and document titles into a chronology limited to the allegations the investigator has listed.
- What the lawyer does: Check each row against the document and against the allegation list. Remove rows that answer a different question.
- Who reviews: Lawyer competent in the matter and the forum
- Basis: Planning guidance checked against the linked public sources on 22 September 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.
- Why: The traffic light follows the consequence of an error and how much of the output the lawyer must check before it is used.
- Written for: NSW

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Use only documents you are allowed to put in the tool.
2. Tie each row to an allegation number or mark it as context.
3. Copy dates from the document.
4. Do not describe a motive or a conclusion.

## Notes

- Suggested working checks from the linked public sources. Read the source and confirm it applies to this forum and this date. The checks do not approve software or record that the work is done.

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: Australia: the workplace, plus any Fair Work or state process that may follow

**Deliverable**: A chronology with one document reference per row and the allegation number it relates to.

**Inputs**

- The investigator’s allegation list
- Emails and other records you are allowed to process

**Example**: An email about a different employee is left out, even if it is in the same inbox export.

**Stop and escalate when**

- Permission to process the records is unclear.
- The draft adds an allegation the investigator has not framed.

Checked 2026-09-22.

## Sources

- [Fair Work Ombudsman: workplace investigations](https://www.fairwork.gov.au/about-us/compliance-and-enforcement/workplace-investigations) (checked 2026-09-22)
- [Law Society of New South Wales: court protocols on AI, current as at 14 May 2026](https://www.lawsociety.com.au/AI-hub/court-protocols-ai) (checked 2026-09-22)

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