Record that a health complaint does not move the limitation date
MaintainedLast reviewed
Key facts
- Human involvement
- YellowClose supervision
- How AI is used
- From the complaint dates and the notice dates the lawyer supplies, set out what section 43 does with conciliation, and say that no opened section moves the limitation date. Do not decide that an excuse is made out.
- What the lawyer must review
- The lawyer decides what, if anything, from conciliation may be used.
- Do not use section 43(2) consent as an exception to section 43(3).
- 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).
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 health-service complaint beside a damages claim.
Produce. A timetable note that separates conciliation from the limitation date.
Have ready. Complaint dates the lawyer supplies; Any notice date; The limitation facts already marked.
Example of the limit. Illustrative example: A conciliation was held and no notice section applies. The note records section 43(3) and records that the limitation date is unchanged by the complaint.
Stop and hand it back when
- The tool is asked to use conciliation words in the damages claim.
- The tool is asked to move the limitation date.
Sources for this task were checked on 2026-10-23.
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
- Section 43(3): evidence of anything said or done in a conciliation is not admissible in any hearing or proceeding in a court or a tribunal.
- Section 43(1) prohibits disclosure outside the process. Section 43(2) allows disclosure with the consent of the person to whom the information relates. That consent was not read as an exception to subsection (3).
- Section 43(4) says the section does not apply to an undertaking under section 38(2). Section 38(2) was not opened.
- Do not diary a change to section 27D or section 27E because a complaint was made. No such effect was in the sections opened.
Forms and precedents for this task
| Form or precedent | Kind | AI use | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| Letter to the Health Complaints Commissioner about a complaint and a damages claim | Letter | AI use Yellow | A letter to the Victorian Health Complaints Commissioner noting that a damages claim is also being considered, and asking how the complaint will be dealt with. |
| Letter to the Health Ombudsman about a complaint and a damages claim | Letter | AI use Yellow | A letter to the Queensland Health Ombudsman noting that a damages claim is also being considered, and that conciliation material is not for use in court. |
| Letter to the Health Care Complaints Commission about a complaint and a damages claim | Letter | AI use Yellow | A letter to the New South Wales Health Care Complaints Commission noting that a damages claim is separate and that the Commission is not asked to order compensation. |
Signed-in accounts can read the full text of each one. All precedents.
Sources
- Health Complaints Act 2016 (Vic) section 43 · 2026-10-23
- Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) section 27D · 2026-10-23
- Limitation of Actions Act 1958 (Vic) section 27E · 2026-10-23
- Supreme Court of Victoria Practice Note SC Gen 25 · 2026-10-23
The complaint file does not stand in for the treating records. Conciliation material stays off the damages chronology unless the lawyer has applied the section.
If this is filed in the Supreme Court of Victoria, Practice Note SC Gen 25, issued on 14 May 2026, calls for particular caution with affidavit material and expert reports, and says confidential information should not go into a public AI tool.