List the Victorian statutory causes the lawyer has already named
MaintainedLast reviewed
Key facts
- Human involvement
- RedLawyer-led
- How AI is used
- Against the facts the lawyer has accepted, list only the causes the lawyer has named, and the facts on the file that match the elements the lawyer has written down. Do not add a cause, and do not write a pleading.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer chooses the causes and writes any pleading.
- Keep the s 91 duty and the Part XIIIA vicarious-liability section on separate rows.
- Confirm that Part XIIIA has commenced before a pleading relies on it.
- Keep the file in the firm's system. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply.
Rules that apply
The document starts from the task name. Change it if this piece of work is different.
The work product
Forum. Victoria. The court in which the pleading is filed.
Produce. An issues list of the causes the lawyer has named, each tied to a fact already on the file.
Have ready. The causes the lawyer has named; The facts the lawyer has accepted; Whether the alleged abuser was an employee.
Example of the limit. Illustrative example: The lawyer has named the s 91 duty and has not named Part XIIIA. The tool lists only the s 91 duty and the facts the lawyer marked. It does not add a vicarious-liability count.
Stop and hand it back when
- The tool is asked to add a cause the lawyer has not named.
- The tool is asked to write a paragraph of a statement of claim.
Sources for this task were checked on 2026-10-23.
Who does what
| Role | What they do |
|---|---|
| Assistance | Supporting preparation only. Against the facts the lawyer has accepted, list only the causes the lawyer has named, and the facts on the file that match the elements the lawyer has written down. Do not add a cause, and do not write a pleading. 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
- The Bird summary holds that common-law vicarious liability is confined to employment and does not extend to a relationship akin to employment. The legal-identity Act does not supply that liability.
- Section 91 imposes a duty to take reasonable care to prevent abuse by an associated individual while the child is under the organisation's care, supervision or authority, and presumes breach unless the organisation proves reasonable precautions.
- Part XIIIA, in the current compilation and inserted by Act No. 5/2026, makes an institution vicariously liable for abuse by an employee or a person akin to an employee where the role supplied the occasion and the person took advantage of it. An independent contractor is not akin to an employee.
- Section 93A(3) says the Part applies to abuse before, on or after its commencement, and s 93A(1) says it does not limit Part XIII. The as-made page did not state the commencement date. Confirm it before reliance.
Sources
- High Court judgment summary, Bird v DP [2024] HCA 41 · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 91 · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 93A · 2026-10-23
- Wrongs Act 1958 (Vic) s 93C · 2026-10-23
- Justice Legislation Amendment (Vicarious Liability for Child Abuse) Act 2026 (Vic), as made · 2026-10-23
The High Court summary says it declined to decide a non-delegable duty because that contention was not pleaded below. The summary is not a substitute for the reasons.
If this is used in a Supreme Court document, the Court's news page on Practice Note SC Gen 25 says court users are responsible for the content whether or not they used AI.