Checklist · Defamation & Media Law
Serious harm evidence table (Defamation Act s 10A)
Evidence table for the serious harm element in s 10A of the Defamation Act 2005 (NSW): extent and audience of publication, gravity of the imputations, evidence of actual harm, and for excluded corporations, serious financial loss.
- Kind
- Checklist. Steps or checks to work through and tick off.
- Where it applies
- New South Wales, Australia
- AI use
- Yellow AI can help in set ways. A lawyer checks specific points before use.
- Law stated as at
- 18 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked on 18 October 2026 against the authority it cites, for New South Wales and Australia.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use when assessing a client's claim before sending a concerns notice, or when defending one, to collect and test the evidence that the publication caused or is likely to cause serious harm to reputation.
Used for these tasks
- Build a serious-harm or threshold-evidence table
- Compile the extent-of-publication data for the respondent’s statement
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 compile reach, audience and response data from captures and analytics into the table; the lawyer decides whether the evidence shows serious harm and what further evidence is needed.
AI may
- Tabulate views, shares, comments, search results and republications from the captures and analytics provided
- List people identified as having read the matter and how they reacted, from the client's instructions and documents
- Flag gaps in the evidence of actual or likely harm
AI must not
- Must not conclude that serious harm is established or not established
- Must not contact readers, witnesses or the publisher
- Must not prepare witness statements or affidavits on harm
The lawyer checks
- The evidence addresses harm to reputation, not hurt feelings alone, and both actual and likely harm
- For an excluded corporation, evidence of serious financial loss is identified
- Reach data is reliable, captured with dates and sources, and admissible
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 Defamation & Media Law
- Concerns notice under the uniform Defamation Acts (with UK letter-of-claim and NZ variants)
- Response to a concerns notice: further particulars notice, or letter declining to make an offer to make amends
- Defences assessment checklist for a publisher facing a defamation complaint
- Deed of settlement and release for a defamation dispute, with agreed correction, apology and removal terms
- Offer to make amends in response to a concerns notice
- Defamation claim assessment checklist for an aggrieved person: publication capture, serious harm, limitation and concerns notice timing
- Digital intermediary liability map for an online publication (Defamation Act s 31A)
- Pre-publication legal review checklist (including AI-generated text, images and quotes)
- Correction, clarification or apology for publication, with placement and prominence schedule
- Takedown demand for AI-generated deepfake or synthetic content (to poster or platform)
- Complaint notice to a digital intermediary (s 31A accessible complaints mechanism) with UK and US variants
- Newsroom and publisher generative AI and synthetic media policy
All precedents for Defamation & Media Law · Tasks and AI use in this area