---
title: "Check a consequential mental harm claim and the limit on economic loss"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss"
type: "task"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A21-FM20261023-10"
practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Check a consequential mental harm claim and the limit on economic loss

> From the medical material the lawyer supplies, row whether the mental harm is described as a consequence of another injury to the same person, and leave a blank beside any claim for economic loss.…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss  
Last reviewed: 2026-10-25

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

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation.md) |
| Human involvement | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the medical material the lawyer supplies, row whether the mental harm is described as a consequence of another injury to the same person, and leave a blank beside any claim for economic loss. Do not decide whether the harm is a recognised psychiatric illness. |
| What the lawyer must review | You decide whether the harm is consequential on an injury to the same person, or is pure mental harm. You decide whether economic loss is recoverable. The tool does not call an illness recognised. Use the economic-loss section you opened. A section limited to consequential harm is not used for pure mental harm. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. A breach may be notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth). |
| Written for / versions | 3 jurisdiction versions below |

## Checking plan

**Consequential harm and economic loss**

The tool rows whether the harm follows another injury to the same person. The lawyer decides the class and whether economic loss is open.

- What the AI does: From the medical material the lawyer supplies, row whether the mental harm is described as a consequence of another injury to the same person, and leave a blank beside any claim for economic loss. Do not decide whether the harm is a recognised psychiatric illness.
- What the lawyer does: You decide whether the harm is consequential on an injury to the same person, or is pure mental harm. You decide whether economic loss is recoverable. The tool does not call an illness recognised. Use the economic-loss section you opened. A section limited to consequential harm is not used for pure mental harm. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. A breach may be notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Practical workflow informed by the linked primary sources; the traffic light and working checks are editorial guidance, not a court classification.
- Why: The level reflects what the work is, the consequence of an error, and how much of the output the lawyer must independently re-derive.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Class the harm from the definition: consequential mental harm is a consequence of an injury of another kind to the plaintiff.
2. Keep a claim about shock at harm to another person on the pure-mental-harm gateway, not on this table.
3. Apply an economic-loss limit only to the kind of mental harm named in that section.
4. Leave the recognised-psychiatric-illness finding blank.

## Notes

- 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.

## Sources

- [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 67](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/wa1958111/s67.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 74](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/wa1958111/s74.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 75](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/wa1958111/s75.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) table of provisions](https://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 27](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s27.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 33](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s33.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) table of provisions](https://legislation.nsw.gov.au/view/html/inforce/current/act-2002-022) (checked 2026-10-23)

## Forms and precedents for this task

| Form or precedent | Kind | AI level | Summary |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Psychiatrist's instructions on a recognised psychiatric illness](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation/psychiatrist-recognised-psychiatric-illness.md) | Letter | Yellow | Letter asking a psychiatrist whether there is a recognised psychiatric illness for a mental harm claim, without asking the psychiatrist to apply the statutory tests. |

Signed-in accounts can read the full text of each one.

## Jurisdiction versions

| Jurisdiction | Level |
| --- | --- |
| [New South Wales](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss/new-south-wales.md) | Yellow |
| [Victoria](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss/victoria.md) | Yellow |
| [Queensland](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss/queensland.md) | Yellow |

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