---
title: "Set out the New South Wales duty questions for mental harm"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-normal-fortitude-questions-for-a-mental-harm-duty-of-care/new-south-wales"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A21-FM20261023-9-NSW"
practice_area: "Personal Injury & Compensation (workers compensation, CTP/TAC, medical negligence)"
tier: "yellow"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["NSW"]
last_reviewed: "2026-10-25"
---

# Set out the New South Wales duty questions for mental harm

> In a firm-controlled tool, list the section 32 circumstances of the Civil Liability Act 2002 and leave every answer blank. Keep section 29 in a separate row.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-normal-fortitude-questions-for-a-mental-harm-duty-of-care/new-south-wales  
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 | In a firm-controlled tool, list the section 32 circumstances of the Civil Liability Act 2002 and leave every answer blank. Keep section 29 in a separate row. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide whether a duty is owed. The questions cover mental harm, not only pure mental harm. For consequential harm, use the personal injury. For pure mental harm, use the circumstances the section lists. Do not treat section 29 as creating the duty. |
| Written for | New South Wales |
| Applies to | [Set out the normal-fortitude questions for a mental harm duty of care](https://ailawframework.com/practice/personal-injury-and-compensation/set-out-the-normal-fortitude-questions-for-a-mental-harm-duty-of-care.md) |

## Checking plan

**New South Wales normal fortitude**

The tool lists the section 32 questions, separately for pure and consequential harm. Section 29 is not the duty test.

- What the AI does: In a firm-controlled tool, list the section 32 circumstances of the Civil Liability Act 2002 and leave every answer blank. Keep section 29 in a separate row.
- What the lawyer does: Make the legal assessment, check the source material and authorise the output for its intended use.
- 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. Use section 27: mental harm means impairment of a person's mental condition.
2. Separate the pure-mental-harm circumstances from the consequential-mental-harm circumstances.
3. Row section 32(4): the court is not required to disregard what the defendant knew or ought to have known about the plaintiff's fortitude.
4. Keep section 29 off the duty row.

## Notes

- Section 27 defines mental harm as impairment of a person's mental condition. Section 32(1) of the Civil Liability Act 2002 says a defendant does not owe a duty to take care not to cause the plaintiff mental harm unless the defendant ought to have foreseen that a person of normal fortitude might, in the circumstances, suffer a recognised psychiatric illness if reasonable care were not taken. For pure mental harm, the circumstances include sudden shock, witnessing at the scene a person being killed, injured or put in peril, the nature of the relationship, and any pre-existing relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant. For consequential mental harm, the circumstances include the personal injury suffered by the plaintiff. Section 32(4) says the section does not require the court to disregard what the defendant knew or ought to have known about the fortitude of the plaintiff. Section 29 says the plaintiff is not prevented from recovering merely because the personal injury arose wholly or in part from mental or nervous shock. Section 29 is not the duty test.
- Family, wage and medical records stay in a firm-controlled tool. ASCR r 9 and APP 11 apply. A breach may be notifiable under the Privacy Act 1988 (Cth).

## Practical guide

Jurisdiction: New South Wales: Civil Liability Act 2002 ss 27, 32 and 29

**Deliverable**: A question list taken from section 32, with every answer blank.

**Inputs**

- Whether the harm is pure or consequential
- The circumstances known to the defendant
- Sections 32 and 29

**Example**: Illustrative example: The claimant was physically injured and later became ill. The tool uses the consequential-harm row, which includes the personal injury, and does not treat section 29 as the duty test.

**Stop and escalate when**

- Section 29 is used as the duty test.
- Pure and consequential harm are given the same circumstance list.

Checked 2026-10-23.

## Sources

- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 32](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s32.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 29](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s29.html) (checked 2026-10-23)
- [Civil Liability Act 2002 (NSW) s 27](https://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cla2002161/s27.html) (checked 2026-10-23)

## Forms and precedents for this task

| Form or precedent | Kind | AI level | Summary |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Psychiatrist's instructions on a recognised psychiatric illness](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/personal-injury-and-compensation/psychiatrist-recognised-psychiatric-illness.md) | Letter | 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.

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