Memo · Class Actions / Representative Proceedings
Pre-filing memo: Part IVA threshold requirements and class definition
Internal memo template testing a proposed Federal Court class action against s 33C (7 or more persons, related circumstances, substantial common issue), s 33H (originating process) and the s 33N risks, and settling the class definition.
- Kind
- Memo. An internal or advice memo.
- Where it applies
- Australia, Commonwealth
- AI use
- Red Keep AI out of the decisive steps. A lawyer does the work.
- Law stated as at
- 18 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 18 October 2026 against the 5 authorities it cites, for Australia and Commonwealth.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use after initial investigation and before a funding decision or filing, to record whether the claim can proceed as a representative proceeding and how the class should be defined. Update it if the claim theory, the respondents or the competing proceedings change.
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
The lawyer writes the analysis and the class definition; AI may organise the evidence, list candidate common questions and test a draft definition against sample client facts.
AI may
- Organise the intake data into a table of potential group members, dates, products and transactions for the lawyer to assess
- List possible common questions of fact and law from the draft pleading theory, for the lawyer to accept or reject
- Test a lawyer's draft class definition against sample client files and report which fall in or out and why
AI must not
- Must not state a conclusion on whether s 33C is satisfied or whether a s 33N application would succeed
- Must not write the class definition that will appear in the originating application
- Must not cite cases or describe their holdings without the lawyer reading them
The lawyer checks
- Each s 33C element is addressed with evidence, including at least 7 persons with claims against the same respondent
- The class definition is objective, ascertainable at the relevant date, and matches the claims and the common questions to be pleaded
- Any group member who needs to give written consent under s 33E (for example government bodies) is identified
- Competing or proposed proceedings are searched and their class definitions compared
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 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 Class Actions / Representative Proceedings
- Opt-out notice, notice distribution plan and settlement-notice checklist (Federal Court class action)
- Retainer letter and conditional costs agreement for a representative applicant (Federal Court class action)
- Litigation funding agreement and costs review checklist (including common fund orders and Victorian group costs orders)
- Settlement approval application checklist (Federal Court class action, s 33V and GPN-CA)
- Settlement distribution scheme (with safeguards for technology-assisted claims assessment)
- Periodic update letter to group members (clients and registered group members)
- Letter to the respondent's lawyers about communications with class members
- Group member registration and intake protocol (including AI triage of registrations)
- Prompt template with guardrails: reconciling registrations to the class definition
All precedents for Class Actions / Representative Proceedings · Tasks and AI use in this area