---
title: "Screen the expert against section 5O, which does not require a significant number"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/screen-a-proposed-liability-expert-against-the-peer-the-section-describe/new-south-wales"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A32-MN20261023-4-NSW"
practice_area: "Health & Medical Law"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["NSW"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Screen the expert against section 5O, which does not require a significant number

> From the proposed expert's field, the year of the treatment, and the field of the practitioner whose care is in issue, make a table against the peer words in section 5O.…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/screen-a-proposed-liability-expert-against-the-peer-the-section-describe/new-south-wales  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-25

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Health & Medical Law](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the proposed expert's field, the year of the treatment, and the field of the practitioner whose care is in issue, make a table against the peer words in section 5O. Do not decide that the opinion would be widely accepted or irrational. Do not draft the report. |
| What the lawyer must review | The lawyer decides whether the proposed expert is a peer. The table does not decide the opinion. Do not add a significant number of respected practitioners. Section 5O does not use those words. Keep health and wage records in a firm-controlled tool, not a public one. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. Decide if a breach is notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). |
| Written for | New South Wales |
| Applies to | [Screen a proposed liability expert against the peer the section describes](https://ailawframework.com/practice/health-and-medical-law/screen-a-proposed-liability-expert-against-the-peer-the-section-describe.md) |

## Checking plan

**Verify against sources**

Section 5O asks whether the professional acted in a manner widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion as competent professional practice. The opinion cannot be relied on if the court considers it irrational.

- What the AI does: From the proposed expert's field, the year of the treatment, and the field of the practitioner whose care is in issue, make a table against the peer words in section 5O. Do not decide that the opinion would be widely accepted or irrational. Do not draft the report.
- What the lawyer does: Make the legal assessment, check the source material and authorise the output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Lawyer competent in this practice area
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 23 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Match the proposed field to the field of the practitioner whose care is in issue, at the time the service was provided.
2. Record the words: widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion as competent professional practice. Do not add a significant number of respected practitioners.
3. Record that the opinion need not be universal, that differing opinions may be relied on, and that it cannot be relied on if the court considers it irrational.
4. Do not draft the report. Practice Note SC Gen 23, paragraph 24, must be drawn to the expert when the lawyer instructs.

## Notes

- Section 5O uses irrational, not unreasonable. No written-reasons subsection was in the section opened. Paragraph 20 says generative AI must not draft an expert report without prior leave, subject to paragraph 23.
- If this is filed in the Supreme Court of New South Wales, Practice Note SC Gen 23, issued on 28 January 2025 and commenced on 3 February 2025, bars generative AI from the content of an affidavit or witness statement, and from an expert report without prior leave, subject to paragraph 23.

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: New South Wales. A screen of a proposed liability expert against section 5O.

**Deliverable**: A screening table against the peer words in section 5O, before the expert is instructed.

**Inputs**

- The proposed expert's field
- The year of the treatment
- The field of the practitioner whose care is in issue

**Example**: Illustrative example: The proposal uses the words a significant number of respected practitioners. The table strikes those words and keeps widely accepted in Australia by peer professional opinion. It does not decide that the opinion is irrational.

**Stop and escalate when**

- The tool is asked to decide that the opinion would be widely accepted or irrational.
- The tool is asked to draft the report.

Checked 2026-10-23.

## Sources

- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 5O](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s5o.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Supreme Court of NSW Practice Note SC Gen 23](https://supremecourt.nsw.gov.au/practice-procedure/generative-artificial-intelligence.html) (checked 2026-10-23)

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