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

# Check New South Wales consequential mental harm and economic loss

> In a firm-controlled tool, row whether the harm is consequential mental harm as section 27 defines it, and leave the section 33 economic-loss finding blank. Do not apply section 31.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss/new-south-wales  
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 | In a firm-controlled tool, row whether the harm is consequential mental harm as section 27 defines it, and leave the section 33 economic-loss finding blank. Do not apply section 31. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide whether the harm is consequential, using the section 27 definition. Apply section 33 only to consequential mental harm. Do not use section 31 here. It is a separate pure-mental-harm check. |
| Written for | New South Wales |
| Applies to | [Check a consequential mental harm claim and the limit on economic loss](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-consequential-mental-harm-claim-and-the-limit-on-economic-loss.md) |

## Checking plan

**New South Wales consequential harm**

The tool classes the harm under section 27 and leaves section 33 blank. Section 33 is limited to consequential mental harm. Section 31 is not applied.

- What the AI does: In a firm-controlled tool, row whether the harm is consequential mental harm as section 27 defines it, and leave the section 33 economic-loss finding blank. Do not apply section 31.
- 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. Use section 27: mental harm is impairment of a person's mental condition.
2. Consequential mental harm is a consequence of a personal injury of any other kind.
3. Apply section 33 only to consequential mental harm.
4. Leave the recognised-psychiatric-illness finding blank.

## Notes

- Section 27 of the Civil Liability Act 2002 defines mental harm as impairment of a person's mental condition, and consequential mental harm as mental harm that is a consequence of a personal injury of any other kind. Section 33 says a court cannot award damages for economic loss for consequential mental harm resulting from negligence unless the harm consists of a recognised psychiatric illness. The opened words are limited to consequential mental harm. They are not the pure-mental-harm illness section. The official table of provisions lists that pure-mental-harm section separately, as section 31, and it is not applied on this task.
- Family, wage and medical records stay in a firm-controlled tool. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. A breach may be notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: New South Wales: Civil Liability Act 2002 ss 27 and 33

**Deliverable**: A table classing the harm, with economic loss left blank.

**Inputs**

- Account of the event selected by the lawyer
- Medical material selected by the lawyer
- The opened mental-harm section

**Example**: Illustrative example: The claimant was not physically injured and claims wage loss for shock. The tool does not use section 33, because its opened words are limited to consequential mental harm. Section 31 is left to its own check.

**Stop and escalate when**

- Section 33 is applied to pure mental harm.
- Section 31 is decided in this table.

Checked 2026-10-23.

## Sources

- [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) s 27](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s27.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.

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