Test a Victorian pure mental harm claim against the Wrongs Act
MaintainedLast reviewed
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- Extract the diagnosis, the relationship to the victim, and whether the person witnessed the event at the scene, and set those facts against Wrongs Act 1958 sections 72, 73 and 74. Do not decide duty or damages.
- What the lawyer must review
- Apply sections 72, 73 and 74. Do not use another state's illness bar.
- Decide whether the harm is pure or consequential, and whether section 73 is met.
- The tool extracts the diagnosis. It does not decide duty or damages.
Rules that apply
The document starts from the task name. Change it if this piece of work is different.
The work product
Forum. Victoria: a Wrongs Act claim for pure or consequential mental harm
Produce. A section-by-section fact map under sections 72, 73 and 74, with the diagnosis and the witness or relationship facts extracted, for the lawyer to decide.
Have ready. Psychiatric diagnosis; How the harm arose; Relationship to the person killed, injured or put in danger; Whether the event was witnessed at the scene.
Example of the limit. Illustrative example: The person was told of a death later and was not at the scene, and is not in a close relationship. The tool marks section 73(2) as not met on those facts. The lawyer decides whether any other pathway is open. The tool does not say there is no claim.
Stop and hand it back when
- The harm has not been classified as pure or consequential.
- Someone proposes to apply the New South Wales section 31 bar as if it were Victorian.
Sources for this task were checked on 2026-10-23.
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Extract the diagnosis, the relationship to the victim, and whether the person witnessed the event at the scene, and set those facts against Wrongs Act 1958 sections 72, 73 and 74. Do not decide duty or damages. |
| Lawyer | Set the scope, supervise the work closely, verify every part relied on, resolve omissions and exceptions, and approve the exact output. |
Checklist
- Classify the harm as pure or consequential before any section is applied. Section 74 is the consequential provision.
- For pure mental harm, section 72 asks whether it was foreseeable that a person of normal fortitude might suffer a recognised psychiatric illness, with the circumstances in subsection (2), and a less-than-normal-fortitude exception in subsection (3).
- Section 73 limits recovery for pure mental harm from shock: the person must have witnessed the victim being killed, injured or put in danger at the scene, or be or have been in a close relationship. No damages if the victim could not have recovered.
- Do not treat section 73 as a rule that there is no liability unless the harm consists of a recognised psychiatric illness. That is the test in Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 31, which was opened for contrast.
Forms and precedents for this task
| Form or precedent | Kind | AI use | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Letter of instruction to a psychiatrist | Letter | AI use Yellow | Letter asking a psychiatrist for diagnosis, causation, treatment and capacity in a plaintiff claim, and for a clinical view on recognised psychiatric illness, without asking for the legal test. |
| 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.
Sources
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 72 · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 73 · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) section 74 · 2026-10-23
- Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) section 31 · 2026-10-23
The AustLII table of the Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld), marked as at 1 July 2024, was opened. It showed no mental-harm chapter. Section text of a Queensland mental-harm provision was not opened, so do not state that Queensland has none as current law.
Keep health, wage and scheme records in a firm-controlled tool. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. A breach may be notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).
If the product supports a court document, apply the note for that court: Supreme Court Practice Note SC GEN 25 (14 May 2026), the County Court practice note on artificial intelligence by court users (9 June 2026), or the Magistrates' Court guidelines issued 19 October 2026. One tool cannot verify another. Do not put confidential or sensitive information into a public tool.