---
title: "Screen the site under the state Aboriginal heritage Act and Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/practice/planning-and-environment/screen-the-site-for-indigenous-cultural-heritage-native-title-or-tribal/australia"
type: "task_jurisdiction_version"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "A12-T1-R8-AU"
practice_area: "Planning & Environment"
tier: "red"
lawyer_review: "required"
jurisdictions: ["AU"]
last_reviewed: "2026-09-23"
---

# Screen the site under the state Aboriginal heritage Act and Native Title Act 1993 (Cth)

> From title, maps and searches, list Aboriginal heritage and Native Title Act future-act flags and missing documents. Do not decide if a CHMP, AHIP or future act applies.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/practice/planning-and-environment/screen-the-site-for-indigenous-cultural-heritage-native-title-or-tribal/australia  
Last reviewed: 2026-09-23

Site index for agents: https://ailawframework.com/llms.txt

## Key facts

| Fact | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Practice area | [Planning & Environment](https://ailawframework.com/practice/planning-and-environment.md) |
| Human involvement | Red: Lawyer writes; AI may check, clarify or collect data |
| How AI is used | From title, maps and searches, list Aboriginal heritage and Native Title Act future-act flags and missing documents. Do not decide if a CHMP, AHIP or future act applies. |
| What the lawyer must review | Decide on a CHMP, AHIP or future-act procedure with an archaeologist or anthropologist Consult registered Aboriginal parties Remember breaching Native Title Act 1993 (Cth) future-act rules may invalidate the activity Check current registered claims, ILUAs and the state register Confirm with the state heritage council or native title body |
| Written for | Australia |
| Applies to | [Screen the site for indigenous cultural-heritage, native-title or tribal-land issues](https://ailawframework.com/practice/planning-and-environment/screen-the-site-for-indigenous-cultural-heritage-native-title-or-tribal.md) |

## Checking plan

**Source-by-source verification**

Trace relied-on content to independent sources and check for relevant material the output has missed.

- What the AI does: Consider narrowly defined preparation support after confirming the tool’s capability and permitted scope.
- What the lawyer does: Set the scope, verify the evidence, resolve exceptions and approve the final output for its intended use.
- Who reviews: Responsible lawyer with competence in the matter
- Basis: Suggested checking approach based on the task guidance. Complete the assessment for the actual tool, information and jurisdiction.
- Why: The plan reflects the described work and review requirements. Policy colours are not used to determine permission or checking.

## Checks the lawyer makes

1. Confirm that the actual tool, feature and processing terms permit use of this information, including access, retention, training and disclosure conditions.
2. Obtain and inspect the relevant current official register or search result. Confirm identities, interests and the date and scope of the search.
3. Confirm the appropriate instructions, permissions and cultural context with the relevant people before using information or communicating the result.
4. Verify the applicable jurisdiction and the version of each relevant law, rule or instrument in force at the material time.
5. Confirm the output against the client’s instructions and the complete relevant source material, including omissions or contradictions.
6. Resolve exceptions and record the responsible lawyer’s approval of the exact output and intended use.

## Notes

- Confirm the required checking with the responsible lawyer before work starts. The checking approach does not establish permission to use AI.

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