---
title: "Competing class actions: comparison note for the carriage or selection hearing"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/class-actions-representative-proceedings/competing-class-actions-note"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a7-competing-class-actions-note"
area_id: "A7"
kind: "memo"
ai_level: "red"
version: 1
task_ids: ["A7-T1-R6"]
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-22"
---

# Competing class actions: comparison note for the carriage or selection hearing

> Internal note comparing competing representative proceedings and recording what GPN-CA paragraph 8 requires the lawyers to tell the Court and to propose.

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/class-actions-representative-proceedings/competing-class-actions-note  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-22

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

## Key facts

- Kind: Memo. An internal or advice memo.
- Practice area: [Class Actions / Representative Proceedings](https://ailawframework.com/precedents/class-actions-representative-proceedings.md)
- Jurisdictions: Australia, Commonwealth
- AI level: 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: 2026-10-22
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-22 against the authority it cites, for Australia and Commonwealth.

## When to use it

Use as soon as the firm learns that another class action, filed or proposed, advances claims of the same group. Tell the Court immediately. Do not wait for this note to be finished.

## Used for these tasks

- [Compare competing class proceedings and draft the carriage or consolidation note](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/compare-competing-class-proceedings-and-draft-the-carriage-or-consolidat.md)

## How AI may be used

The lawyer writes the comparison and any proposal to the Court. AI may place the filed pleadings side by side and list dates.

**AI may:**

- Put the parties, filing dates, class periods and pleaded statutes into a comparison table from the originating processes
- List the paragraph 8.5 topics with a blank for the lawyer
- Record the time by which a proposal is due (4.00pm before the listing)

**AI must not:**

- Must not recommend which proceeding should continue, or draft the proposal to the associate
- Must not state that one proceeding is or is not a representative proceeding under s 33C
- Must not contact the Court or another firm's lawyers

**The lawyer checks:**

- The associate has been told of the competing proceeding immediately, as paragraph 8.2 requires, without waiting for the analysis
- The class definitions, common questions and originating processes have been read, not summarised from a secondary source
- Any proposal sent by 4.00pm before the listing is the lawyers' proposal and addresses the paragraph 8.5 topics the Court will ask about
- A proceeding in a State court is flagged so the Court can consider the joint-management protocol

## Authorities

- [Federal Court of Australia, Class Actions Practice Note (GPN-CA), Part 8 (definition of a competing class action; notice to the associate; agreed or competing proposals; matters the Court will ascertain)](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/law-and-practice/practice-documents/practice-notes/gpn-ca)

## 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/class-actions-representative-proceedings/competing-class-actions-note 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.*