Policy · Confidentiality & client information
Information barrier protocol for one matter
Protocol for one current matter where the practice holds confidential information of a former client: who is screened, what is locked, what undertakings are signed, and which tools the two groups must not share.
- Kind
- Policy. A policy or procedure for a firm or client.
- Where it applies
- New South Wales, Queensland
- AI use
- Yellow You and the tool draft together, with you directing. You check every statement you rely on.
- Law stated as at
- 22 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 22 October 2026 against the 4 authorities it cites, for New South Wales and Queensland.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when the practice is asked to act against a former client and a partner is considering an information barrier instead of informed consent. Do not use it as the only control between two current clients, or as a decision that the barrier will be effective.
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 names and files from the conflict note the principal supplies. The principal decides who is screened and whether the practice may act.
AI may
- Place names, roles and file locations from the conflict note into the tables
- List shared systems on the firm's inventory that both groups can currently open
AI must not
- Must not decide that the barrier is effective or that the practice may act
- Must not treat a former client's silence as consent
- Must not describe the protocol as sufficient for two current clients
The lawyer checks
- Rule 10.2 applies: the information is confidential to a former client, might reasonably be material to the current matter, and would be detrimental to the former client if disclosed
- Either informed consent to disclosure and use is actually held, or the principal has settled this protocol and the undertakings
- No shared mailbox, document system or AI tool lets the current-matter group open the screened material
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 Confidentiality & client information
- AI confidentiality rules for staff (short form of the firm AI policy)
- Waiver of a concurrent conflict of interest (United States)
- Checklist before any file on a matter goes into a tool
- Staff and contractor AI confidentiality undertaking and acknowledgement
- Protocol before using a self-learning generative AI tool (United States)
- AI vendor confidentiality and privilege questions (short form of the vendor due-diligence questionnaire)
- Inventory of systems that can see client material
- Staff undertaking on unapproved generative AI tools (United States)
- Engagement clause: client authority for AI processing of confidential information (rider to the AI engagement clauses)
- Comparison of a provider's terms on storage, training and subprocessors
- Check before using a hypothetical in a generative AI tool (United States)
- AI data incident steps (confidentiality short form of the AI incident response procedure)
- Confidentiality undertaking for an external reviewer or expert
All precedents for Confidentiality & client information · Tasks and AI use in this area