Letter · Administrative & Public Law
Request for reasons and review of an automated or AI-assisted government decision
A letter to a Commonwealth agency asking whether and how an automated system or AI shaped a decision, who actually decided, and under what authority, while seeking reasons, preservation of system records and review.
- Kind
- Letter. A letter or email you adapt and send.
- Where it applies
- Australia, Commonwealth, United Kingdom (England and Wales), European Union
- AI use
- Yellow AI can help in set ways. A lawyer checks specific points before use.
- Law stated as at
- 17 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 17 October 2026 against the 10 authorities it cites, for 4 jurisdictions.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when a decision looks system-generated (template letters, data matching, risk scores, debt calculations) or the client suspects AI was used. Use it alongside, not instead of, the time-limited review application. Do not use it as the only step when a review deadline is close.
How AI may be used
AI may help map the visible automated steps against the review grounds and tailor the question list. A lawyer settles the legal theory, the questions put and the review strategy, and checks every factual statement against the decision papers.
AI may
- Extract the decision dates, reference numbers, amounts and template wording from the decision papers into a chronology with page references.
- Flag signs of automation in the papers (identical template text, system codes, calculated figures, no named officer) for the lawyer to assess.
- Draft tailored versions of the questions in paragraph 4 from the lawyer's instructions.
AI must not
- Must not assert that AI or automation was used unless the papers or the agency confirm it; frame it as a question.
- Must not enter the client's Centrelink, tax, visa or health records into a public AI tool or one that trains on inputs.
- Must not give the client a view on prospects of review, or on whether a decision was validly made, without lawyer review.
The lawyer checks
- The correct reasons regime and review pathway, and that every review deadline is diarised independently of this letter.
- Whether the enabling Act expressly authorises computer-made decisions, and what follows if it does not.
- That the preservation request is proportionate and that any FOI request in the letter meets FOI Act s 15(2).
- That foreign-law references are deleted unless the decision-maker is subject to UK or EU law.
Method: how the Green, Yellow and Red levels are decided. This is guidance for planning, not legal advice.
Official form
Open the official form. Always use the current version from the issuer.
Read the full text
The full text is for signed-in accounts. It is free. When you sign 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
- Freedom of information access application (Commonwealth, with NSW and NZ variants and review follow-ups)
- Request for a statement of reasons for an administrative decision, with reasons-deficiency table
- Application to the Administrative Review Tribunal for review: completion guide (including the Generative AI Practice Direction)
- 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
All precedents for Administrative & Public Law · Tasks and AI use in this area