Build the hazard and inspection chronology for a premises fall
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- From the incident report, photographs and inspection or cleaning records the lawyer marks, list each hazard, inspection and earlier complaint with the date and the document. Do not write a medical chronology or the client's account.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer decides which documents show the hazard, any inspection, and any earlier complaint.
- Use a date only when the named document shows it. This is not a medical chronology.
- 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).
Open a jurisdiction version of this task to see which instruments apply: NSWVICQLD
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | From the incident report, photographs and inspection or cleaning records the lawyer marks, list each hazard, inspection and earlier complaint with the date and the document. Do not write a medical chronology or the client's account. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Every date in the chronology cites the document that bears it.
- Keep treatment and wage entries out of this table.
- Do not describe the client's account of the fall as if it were a record.
- Flag a gap where no inspection or cleaning record has been produced.
Sources
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 48, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 53, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 9, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 5B, AustLII · 2026-10-23
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.
If the same facts later go into an affidavit or witness statement in the District Court of New South Wales, its Generative AI Practice Note (commenced 3 February 2025) says generative AI must not generate that content.
Supreme Court of Victoria practice note SC GEN 25 (commenced 14 May 2026) calls for particular caution where generative AI assists with affidavit material, a witness statement or an expert report. The document must reflect the person's own knowledge.
Supreme Court of Queensland Practice Direction 5 of 2025 requires the practitioner responsible for written submissions to be named, and to verify the references.