Checklist · Administrative & Public Law
ART protected information and Generative AI tools
Paragraphs 3.17 to 3.21 of the ART Use of Generative AI Practice Direction 2026. Protected information must not go into a public tool unless that is lawful and authorised, or into a private tool unless it will stay confidential.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- Australia, Commonwealth
- AI use
- Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the authority it cites, for Australia and Commonwealth.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use before confidential, private, privileged or otherwise protected information is entered into a Generative AI tool for an Administrative Review Tribunal proceeding. The examples include documents produced under sections 23 and 25 of the Act, documents produced under a direction, and summonsed documents.
Used for these tasks
Each task page says how far AI may help with the task and what the lawyer must review.
How AI may be used
AI may identify which class in paragraph 3.18 a document appears to fall into. The lawyer decides whether entry is lawful. A wrong entry can breach a Tribunal order or an implied obligation.
AI may
- Class the document against the paragraph 3.18 examples
- Record whether the proposed tool is publicly available or privately available, using the paragraph 1.12 definitions
AI must not
- Must not enter protected information into a publicly available tool unless the lawyer is satisfied that is lawful, authorised, and consistent with every obligation
- Must not enter it into a privately available tool unless satisfied it will remain confidential and cannot be shared
- Must not treat a ringfenced tool as safe if outputs will later be used for a different purpose
The lawyer checks
- Paragraph 3.20 or 3.21, as applicable, is met before anything is entered
- Sections 23 and 25, summonses, and privilege are considered on the documents actually held. The Act was not opened
- The implied obligation in paragraph 3.18 is considered where the material came from another party or a third person
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Read the full text
The full text is available after you log in. It is free. When you log in you can:
- read the whole precedent, with its drafting notes beside it;
- copy it, or download it as a Word file or Markdown;
- add it to your firm’s knowledge base, so colleagues can find it;
- let the AI tools you connect read it from that knowledge base.
The summary, the law it rests on and the AI-use guidance above stay public. Privacy.
More in Administrative & Public Law
- ART disclosure where Generative AI touches evidence
- Freedom of information access application (Commonwealth, with NSW and NZ variants and review follow-ups)
- Request consultation notice for a practical refusal reason
- Application for review of a decision (ACAT): completion guide
- Authority for a representative (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Application for extension of time to apply for review (Administrative Review Tribunal): preparation guide
- Application for leave to appeal or appeal (QCAT Form 39)
- Letter before judicial review proceedings to a Commonwealth decision-maker (ADJR Act), with time-limit and genuine steps record
- ART checks before a Generative AI submission is lodged
- Public interest factors for a conditionally exempt document
- FOI third-party consultation notice: business information or personal information (FOI Act ss 27 and 27A)
- Request for a stay order (Administrative Review Tribunal): when a stay is available and how to ask for one
- Withdrawal of an application (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Application to stay a decision (QCAT Form 44)
- General review form (TASCAT Administrative Stream): completion guide
- Request for a statement of reasons for an administrative decision, with reasons-deficiency table
- Judicial review grounds from the record
- Agency submission in response to a Commonwealth Ombudsman draft report or proposed critical opinions (Ombudsman Act s 8(5))
- Request for reasons and review of an automated or AI-assisted government decision
- Application to be made a party (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Request to issue a summons (Administrative Review Tribunal): give evidence, produce documents, or both
- Initiating application for a review (NTCAT Form 1): completion guide
- Application for miscellaneous matters (QCAT Form 40)
- Time table for an order of review
- Application to the Administrative Review Tribunal for review: completion guide (including the Generative AI Practice Direction)
- ART checklist before Generative AI material is lodged
- Notice opposing an extension of time (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Request for reasons for a QCAT decision
- Review or original application (State Administrative Tribunal): completion guide
- ART certification if the Tribunal requires it
- Request to shorten time for lodging documents (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Registration and sunsetting check for a legislative instrument
- Complaint to the Commonwealth Ombudsman: preparation guide and complaint summary
- Agency AI transparency statement under the DTA standard: advice note and template for government clients
- Hearing certificate (Administrative Review Tribunal)
- Guidance and Appeals Panel referral request, first instance
- Request for access under the FOI Act (Administrative Review Tribunal)
All precedents for Administrative & Public Law · Tasks and AI use in this area