---
title: "Pre-filing memo: Part IVA threshold requirements and class definition"
url: "https://ailawframework.com/precedents/class-actions-representative-proceedings/part-iva-threshold-and-class-definition-memo"
type: "precedent"
site: "AI Law Framework"
id: "a7-part-iva-threshold-and-class-definition-memo"
area_id: "A7"
kind: "memo"
ai_level: "red"
version: 1
task_ids: ["A7-T1-R1", "A7-T1-R2"]
law_stated_as_at: "2026-10-18"
---

# 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…

Canonical page: https://ailawframework.com/precedents/class-actions-representative-proceedings/part-iva-threshold-and-class-definition-memo  
Law stated as at: 2026-10-18

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

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.

## 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. Keep AI out of the decisive steps. A lawyer does the work.
- Law stated as at: 2026-10-18
- Status: Maintained. Checked on 2026-10-18 against the 5 authorities it cites, for Australia and Commonwealth.

## 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

- [Build a viability memo: cause of action, class size and common questions](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings/build-a-viability-memo-cause-of-action-class-size-and-common-questions.md)
- [Draft the group or class definition from the claim theory](https://ailawframework.com/practice/class-actions-representative-proceedings.md#A7-T1-R2)

## 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

## Authorities

- [Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 33C (commencement: 7 or more persons; same, similar or related circumstances; substantial common issue of law or fact)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A01586/latest/text)
- [Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) ss 33D, 33E and 33G (standing; when consent is required to be a group member; no proceeding resting only on cross-vesting jurisdiction)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A01586/latest/text)
- [Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 33H (originating process must describe group members, the nature of the claims and relief, and the common questions)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A01586/latest/text)
- [Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth) s 33N (order that the proceeding not continue as a representative proceeding)](https://www.legislation.gov.au/C2004A01586/latest/text)
- [Federal Court of Australia, Class Actions Practice Note (GPN-CA) paras 3.1 and 3.2 (Form 19 originating application, Form 17 statement of claim, the applicant's claim as the vehicle for the common questions) and para 8 (competing class actions)](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/part-iva-threshold-and-class-definition-memo 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.*