---
title: "ART protected information and Generative AI tools"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/administrative-and-public-law/art-protected-information"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a31-art-protected-information"
area_id: "A31"
kind: "checklist"
ai_level: "yellow"
version: 1
task_ids: ["A31-B6-1"]
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-22"
---

# 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…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/administrative-and-public-law/art-protected-information  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-22

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

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.

## Key facts

- Kind: Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Practice area: [Administrative & Public Law](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/administrative-and-public-law.md)
- Jurisdictions: Australia, Commonwealth
- AI level: Yellow. You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-22
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-22 against the authority it cites, for Australia and Commonwealth.

## 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

- [Prepare a tribunal submission compliant with the ART Gen AI practice direction](https://ailawframework.com/practice/administrative-and-public-law/prepare-a-tribunal-submission-compliant-with-the-art-gen-ai-practice-dir.md)

## 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

## Authorities

- [Administrative Review Tribunal (Use of Generative AI) Practice Direction 2026, paragraphs 3.17 to 3.21](https://www.art.gov.au/sites/default/files/2026-08/Administrative%20Review%20Tribunal%20%28Generative%20AI%29%20Practice%20Direction.pdf)

## Full text and drafting notes

The full text and the drafting notes are not part of this public page. Signed-in firm accounts can read them at https://ailawframework.com/precedents/administrative-and-public-law/art-protected-information and through the signed-in MCP connector https://ailawframework.com/mcp/firm.

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