Check a public authority's resources protection for a park, reserve or building
Key facts
- Human involvement
- RedLawyer-led
- How AI is used
- List the function the lawyer identifies, the resource material in the brief, and the section the other side has named. Do not write the advice on whether the protection applies.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer decides whether a resources principle or a special-power test applies, and writes the advice.
- Do not use this task for a road or footpath non-feasance question.
- 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).
Open a jurisdiction version of this task to see which instruments apply: NSWVICQLD
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Supporting preparation only. List the function the lawyer identifies, the resource material in the brief, and the section the other side has named. Do not write the advice on whether the protection applies. The tool writes nothing into the document. Substantive advice, judgement and any restricted content remain with the responsible human. |
| Lawyer | Perform the substantive analysis and decisions. Independently check any permitted supporting work and approve the exact output for its intended use. |
Checklist
- Confirm the claim is about a park, reserve or building, not a road or footpath.
- In Victoria do not add an allocation sentence. Section 83 does not contain one.
- In Victoria keep section 83 (duty and breach) separate from section 84 (breach of statutory duty).
- In New South Wales separate section 42 from the section 43A special-power test.
Sources
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) authorised version 130 · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) version 130, in force · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 83, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 35, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 42, AustLII · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 43A, AustLII · 2026-10-23
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.