Policy · In-House / General Counsel
Legal professional privilege protocol for in-house teams (including AI tools and meeting transcription)
An organisation-wide protocol that tells staff how to create, keep and not lose legal professional privilege, with specific rules for AI tools, AI meeting note-takers, prompts and outputs, investigations and regulator requests.
- Kind
- Policy. A policy or procedure for a firm or client.
- Where it applies
- Australia
- AI use
- Yellow AI can help in set ways. A lawyer checks specific points before use.
- Law stated as at
- 17 October 2026
- Status
- Maintained. Checked against the cited sources on 17 October 2026.
- Version
- 1
- Source
- Written for this library
When to use it
Use to set the rules for staff who seek, receive or handle legal advice in an organisation with an in-house legal team. It does not decide any individual privilege claim; each claim is assessed by a lawyer on its facts.
How AI may be used
AI may help Legal review how staff use AI tools and map where privileged material sits. Lawyers decide whether material is privileged and every claim, and staff follow the AI rules in clause 9.
AI may
- Inventory where legal advice is stored and which AI tools, note-takers and integrations can reach those locations.
- Draft training materials and examples from this protocol for lawyer review.
- In an approved tool, extract metadata (author, recipients, date) to help a lawyer prepare a privilege review.
AI must not
- Must not decide that a document is privileged, or write privilege log descriptions.
- Must not receive legal advice or requests for advice in any tool that Legal has not approved for privileged material.
- Must not join or transcribe meetings with lawyers unless Legal has approved that use for that meeting.
The lawyer checks
- The list of approved AI tools for privileged material is current and their terms prevent training on inputs and disclosure to others.
- AI note-taker settings default to off for meetings with Legal.
- Litigation holds extend to AI prompts, outputs and transcripts.
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 In-House / General Counsel
- Legal services request and triage form (in-house legal team)
- Whistleblower policy (Corporations Act Part 9.4AAA and tax whistleblowers), with rules for AI and case-management tools
- Board legal and regulatory risk report (memo template, including AI risk and how the paper was prepared)
- Litigation hold (document preservation) notice, covering chat, AI prompts, outputs and meeting transcripts
- AI tool approval request, risk assessment and register entry (legal team and business use)
- Organisational AI use policy: completion guide for the National AI Centre template (legal team additions)
All precedents for In-House / General Counsel · Tasks and AI use in this area