Check Victorian consequential mental harm and the limit on economic loss
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- In a firm-controlled tool, row whether the mental harm is a consequence of an injury of another kind, using section 67. Leave section 75's economic-loss finding blank.
- What the lawyer must review
- Decide whether the harm is consequential or pure.
- Apply section 74 as the damages test for consequential mental harm.
- Apply section 75 to economic loss for mental harm. Its opened words are not confined to consequential harm.
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 | Do not begin AI assistance until the responsible lawyer has defined and confirmed its 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
- 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.