Record that the Queensland Civil Liability Act states no mental-harm economic-loss limit
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- In a firm-controlled tool, record that the opened table of provisions of the Civil Liability Act 2003 contains no definition of consequential mental harm and no section limiting economic loss for mental harm. Leave the claim undecided.
- What the lawyer must review
- Do not apply an economic-loss limit taken from another statute.
- Do not invent a consequential-mental-harm definition. The opened table has none.
- Do not treat the absent section as a finding that wage loss is recoverable.
Rules that apply
The document starts from the task name. Change it if this piece of work is different.
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Consider narrowly defined preparation support after confirming the tool’s capability and permitted scope. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
- Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
- Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.
Forms and precedents for this task
| Form or precedent | Kind | AI use | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Psychiatrist's instructions on a recognised psychiatric illness | Letter | AI use 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. All precedents.