---
title: "Record whether a risk meets the Queensland obvious-risk description"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/record-whether-a-risk-meets-the-obvious-risk-description/queensland"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A21-SB20261022-6-QLD"
practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["QLD"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Record whether a risk meets the Queensland obvious-risk description

> From the description of the risk and of the person who suffered harm, build a description table against section 13. Do not decide whether the risk was obvious, and do not decide whether a duty to warn was owed.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/record-whether-a-risk-meets-the-obvious-risk-description/queensland  
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 | Yellow: Lawyer and AI draft together |
| How AI is used | From the description of the risk and of the person who suffered harm, build a description table against section 13. Do not decide whether the risk was obvious, and do not decide whether a duty to warn was owed. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide whether the risk would have been obvious to a reasonable person in that person's position Apply sections 14 and 15 only after that decision, including the exceptions to the warning rule Check section 5 before using this division on a work injury The lawyer writes any pleading or advice |
| Written for | Queensland |
| Applies to | [Record whether a risk meets the obvious-risk description](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/record-whether-a-risk-meets-the-obvious-risk-description.md) |

## Checking plan

**Verify against sources**

The lawyer decides whether the risk was obvious. The tool only sets out the section 13 description.

- What the AI does: From the description of the risk and of the person who suffered harm, build a description table against section 13. Do not decide whether the risk was obvious, and do not decide whether a duty to warn was owed.
- What the lawyer does: The lawyer decides whether the risk was obvious and what follows for any warning or voluntary assumption argument.
- Who reviews: Lawyer competent in this practice area
- Basis: Checked against the linked sources on 23 October 2026. Confirm the current instrument before reliance.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Section 13(1) asks whether the risk would have been obvious to a reasonable person in the position of the person who suffered harm. A low probability, and a risk that is not prominent, can still be obvious.
2. Section 13(5) says a risk from a thing is not obvious if it comes from a failure to operate, maintain, replace, prepare or care for the thing, unless that failure itself is obvious.
3. Section 14 is a presumption of awareness if voluntary assumption of risk is raised. Section 15 says there is no proactive duty to warn of an obvious risk, with exceptions where advice was requested, a written law requires a warning, or a professional other than a doctor is providing a professional service.
4. Check section 5. This division does not decide liability for a work injury or a dust-related condition to which that section applies.

## Notes

- Section 15(3) says that section 15(2) does not give rise to a presumption of a duty to warn in the exception cases. The note to section 15 points to section 21 for a doctor's duty to warn. That section was not the test used here.
- The tool records the facts the lawyer supplies. It does not find that a risk was obvious.
- If the table is later used in a submission, Supreme Court Practice Direction 5 of 2025 or District Court Practice Direction 12 of 2025 requires a named practitioner to verify the references.

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: Queensland claim to which Civil Liability Act 2003, chapter 2, part 1, division 3 applies

**Deliverable**: A description table of the risk against section 13, with the conclusion left blank.

**Inputs**

- The lawyer's description of the risk
- The position of the person who suffered harm
- Whether a warning, a request for advice, or a professional service is in issue

**Example**: Illustrative example: The draft describes a cracked frame that was not visible. The lawyer uses section 13(5) and does not treat the risk as obvious merely because go-carts are dangerous.

**Stop and escalate when**

- The facts of the risk are not yet instructed.
- The claim may be outside the Act under section 5.

Checked 2026-10-23.

## Sources

- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 13](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s13.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 14](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s14.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 15](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s15.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2003 (Qld) section 5](https://www.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdoc/au/legis/qld/consol_act/cla2003161/s5.html) (checked 2026-10-23)

*Practice guidance for planning and review. Confirm current primary sources and the requirements of the actual matter. This is general information, not legal advice.*