---
title: "Draft an AI-use policy against OAIC guidance and the Voluntary AI Safety Standard"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/draft-the-organisation-s-ai-use-policy-and-review-an-ai-vendor-contract/commonwealth"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A40-T1-R12-CTH"
practice_area: "In-House / General Counsel"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["CTH"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Draft an AI-use policy against OAIC guidance and the Voluntary AI Safety Standard

> Draft an AI-use policy from the tool inventory and list vendor data, training, indemnity and audit issues against OAIC guidance, the Voluntary AI Safety Standard and ISO 42001.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/draft-the-organisation-s-ai-use-policy-and-review-an-ai-vendor-contract/commonwealth  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [In-House / General Counsel](https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | Draft an AI-use policy from the tool inventory and list vendor data, training, indemnity and audit issues against OAIC guidance, the Voluntary AI Safety Standard and ISO 42001. |
| What the lawyer must review | Test the policy against actual tool use Check vendor retention and training terms (APP 11; APP 8 for offshore processing) Check OAIC's October 2024 guidance and the October 2025 Guidance for AI Adoption Check the National AI Plan |
| Written for | Commonwealth |
| Applies to | [Draft the organisation's AI-use policy and review an AI-vendor contract](https://ailawframework.com/practice/in-house-general-counsel/draft-the-organisation-s-ai-use-policy-and-review-an-ai-vendor-contract.md) |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Trace relied-on content to independent sources and check for relevant material the output has missed.

- 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. Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
3. Confirm instructions and personal circumstances through appropriate direct engagement. Have the responsible lawyer assess safety, capacity or vulnerability concerns and escalation.
4. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
5. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
6. 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.*