Checklist · AI decision systems
Inventory of automated decisions that affect individuals
Working inventory of computer programs the firm or a client has arranged to make, or to substantially inform, a decision that could significantly affect a person's rights or interests.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- Australia
- AI use
- Red You write the text. The tool writes nothing into the document. Where permitted, it may check, clarify or collect data, and anything it checks or collects is verified.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the authority it cites, for Australia.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when mapping systems for the privacy-policy disclosure that APP 1.7 requires from 10 December 2026, or when a client asks which of its systems make decisions about people. The principal classifies each system. This inventory is not the privacy policy.
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 list system names and descriptions from documents the principal supplies. The principal decides which rows are decisions under APP 1.7 and writes every conclusion.
AI may
- Copy the name, vendor and a short description from a system list or a contract the principal marks as the source
- Leave the classification columns blank
AI must not
- Must not mark a system as inside or outside APP 1.7
- Must not describe a human review as taking the system outside the obligation
- Must not draft the privacy-policy wording from this inventory
The lawyer checks
- Each classification is the principal's, against APP 1.7(a), (b) and (c) as the OAIC states them
- Systems that only recommend a decision are still assessed, because a recommendation can be substantially and directly related to the decision
- Nothing in this inventory is copied into a privacy policy until the principal has written that policy
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 AI decision systems
- Law firm AI use policy (master firm policy)
- Law firm generative AI use policy (United States)
- Approved AI tools register (template with field guide)
- Record of a test for different results across groups
- Approval and training record for a generative AI tool (United States)
- AI vendor due-diligence questionnaire for law firms (master version)
- Legal risk table for a client's AI system
- How to mark generative AI output in the file (United States)
- AI incident response procedure for law firms (master procedure for all AI incidents)
- Record that a person reviewed an automated output
- File note of a generative AI confidentiality incident (United States)
- AI decision system impact and fairness assessment (firm or client systems)
- Reassessment when a model, purpose or provider changes
- Privacy policy clause on automated decisions (APP 1.7 to 1.9, from 10 December 2026)
All precedents for AI decision systems · Tasks and AI use in this area