--- title: "Check a dangerous recreational activity defence" url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-dangerous-recreational-activity-defence" type: "task" site: "AI Law Framework" id: "A21-PL20261023-4" practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)" tier: "red" lawyer_review: "required" last_reviewed: "2026-10-25" --- # Check a dangerous recreational activity defence > List the activity, the risk the other side names, and whether the client knew of it, each tied to a document. Do not decide whether the defence succeeds. Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-dangerous-recreational-activity-defence 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 | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data | | How AI is used | List the activity, the risk the other side names, and whether the client knew of it, each tied to a document. Do not decide whether the defence succeeds. | | What the lawyer must review | The lawyer decides whether a dangerous-recreational-activity defence is engaged, and writes the advice. Do not treat a risk warning or a signed form as that defence. Those are separate questions. 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). | | Written for / versions | 3 jurisdiction versions below | ## Checking plan **Lawyer-led judgement** The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks. - What the AI does: List the activity, the risk the other side names, and whether the client knew of it, each tied to a document. Do not decide whether the defence succeeds. - What the lawyer does: The lawyer decides whether a dangerous-recreational-activity defence is engaged, and writes the advice. Do not treat a risk warning or a signed form as that defence. Those are separate questions. 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). - 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. - Restriction: The lawyer makes the substantive assessment. Any permitted AI assistance remains supporting work with its own checks. ## Checks the lawyer makes 1. In Victoria apply sections 54 and 55. Do not call either a dangerous-recreational-activity defence. 2. Compare the activity with the definition that was opened, including the New South Wales place limb. 3. Record whether the client knew of the risk, and that both opened defences apply whether or not the person knew. 4. Keep a risk warning and any signed form for the separate tasks. ## 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. - 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. ## Sources - [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) authorised version 130](https://content.legislation.vic.gov.au/sites/default/files/2026-02/58-6420a130.docx) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) version 130, in force](https://www.legislation.vic.gov.au/in-force/acts/wrongs-act-1958/130) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 53, AustLII](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/vic/consol_act/wa1958111/s53.html) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 18, AustLII](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s18.html) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 19, AustLII](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s19.html) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 5K, AustLII](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s5k.html) (checked 2026-10-23) - [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 5L, AustLII](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s5l.html) (checked 2026-10-23) ## Jurisdiction versions | Jurisdiction | Level | | --- | --- | | [New South Wales](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-dangerous-recreational-activity-defence/new-south-wales.md) | Red | | [Victoria](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-dangerous-recreational-activity-defence/victoria.md) | Red | | [Queensland](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/check-a-dangerous-recreational-activity-defence/queensland.md) | Red | *Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*