category: Assignment

source_type: assignment

content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Assignment
Source type: assignment

SOURCE NOTES:
- Consequently statutory definition provide needed certainty
- It define confine personal claims
- But Existing System Works However argued existing Torrens system functions effectively
- The common already provides registration absent fraud exemptions grants title immediately registration
- It provides fraud generally narrowly applied
- On basis statutory definition little ordinary matters
- It would not change the outcome
- It merely restate already known
- In addition definition risks rigidity thereby restricting equitable relief

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: a statutory definition would provide for well needed certainty
- atom 2: would define and confine personal claims
- atom 3: but the Existing System Works However | it could be argued that the existing Torrens system functions effectively
- atom 4: the common law already provides that registration | absent of fraud and other exemptions | grants title immediately | upon registration
- atom 5: also provides that fraud is generally narrowly applied
- atom 6: a statutory definition would add little in ordinary matters
- atom 7: would not change the outcome
- atom 8: would merely restate what is already known
- atom 9: a definition risks rigidity | thereby restricting equitable relief

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: Consequently statutory definition provide needed certainty

notes: But Existing System Works However argued existing Torrens system functions effectively

notes: The common already provides registration absent fraud exemptions grants title immediately registration

notes: It provides fraud generally narrowly applied

notes: On basis statutory definition little ordinary matters

notes: In addition definition risks rigidity thereby restricting equitable relief

notes: but the Existing System Works However | it could be argued that the existing Torrens system functions effectively

notes: the common law already provides that registration | absent of fraud and other exemptions | grants title immediately | upon registration

notes: a definition risks rigidity | thereby restricting equitable relief

reference: Consequently, a statutory definition would provide for well needed certainty. It would define and confine personal claims. But the Existing System Works However, it could be argued that the existing Torrens system functions effectively. The common law already provides that registration, absent of fraud and other exemptions, grants title immediately, upon registration. It also provides that fraud is generally narrowly applied. On this basis, a statutory definition would add little in ordinary matters. It would not change the outcome. It would merely restate what is already known. In addition, a definition risks rigidity, thereby restricting equitable relief.

rejected: Consequently, a statutory definition would provide some needed certainty. It could define or confine personal claims. But, However, it has been argued that the existing Torrens system functions effectively. The common law already provides that registration (absent fraud or other exemptions) grants title immediately on registration. It provides that fraud is generally narrowly applied. On this basis, a statutory definition would add little in ordinary matters. It would not change the outcome. It would merely restate what is already known. In addition, a definition risks rigidity, thereby restricting equitable relief.

source_path: /Users/Mathieu/Desktop/Monash Law JD/SS_LAW5018/35709820_LAW5018 (Adv Property)_Assignment_T1_2026_FINAL.docx

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Close in content but still not voice-clean: “But, However” is malformed, “could define or confine” weakens the reference, and the paragraph reads as corrected generic prose rather than Mat's actual movement.

voice_clone33_integrity_note: Source atoms are used because prior compressed notes omitted source-critical polarity and qualifiers. A deterministic post-guard correction layer fixes known VC31/VC32 proof defects. This remains a progression proof, not final acceptance without Mat review.


content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Assignment
Source type: assignment

SOURCE NOTES:
- However it does not sit easily with drones
- Drone interference is often brief
- It consist brief hover taking
- Each incident insufficient demonstrate substantial unreasonable interference
- Yet drone use frequent especially early morning night nuisance established
- Additionally drones can be loud
- They noise levels exceeding ordinary conversation
- This amount private nuisance A reasonable person affected noise level unduly sensitive noise

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: it does not sit easily with drones
- atom 2: drone interference is often brief
- atom 3: may consist of a brief hover | taking off in the sky
- atom 4: each incident may be insufficient on its own to demonstrate substantial and unreasonable interference
- atom 5: where drone use is frequent | especially in the early morning | or late at night | nuisance could be established
- atom 6: drones can be loud
- atom 7: they can emit noise levels exceeding ordinary conversation
- atom 8: would amount to private nuisance. A reasonable person affected by such a noise level could not be said to be 'unduly sensitive to noise'

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: However it does not sit easily with drones

notes: Each incident insufficient demonstrate substantial unreasonable interference

notes: Yet drone use frequent especially early morning night nuisance established

notes: They noise levels exceeding ordinary conversation

notes: This amount private nuisance A reasonable person affected noise level unduly sensitive noise

notes: may consist of a brief hover | taking off in the sky

notes: each incident may be insufficient on its own to demonstrate substantial and unreasonable interference

notes: where drone use is frequent | especially in the early morning | or late at night | nuisance could be established

notes: they can emit noise levels exceeding ordinary conversation

notes: would amount to private nuisance. A reasonable person affected by such a noise level could not be said to be 'unduly sensitive to noise'

reference: However, it does not sit easily with drones. Drone interference is often brief. It may consist of a brief hover, taking off in the sky. Each incident may be insufficient on its own to demonstrate substantial and unreasonable interference. Yet where drone use is frequent, especially in the early morning, or late at night, nuisance could be established. Additionally, drones can be loud. They can emit noise levels exceeding ordinary conversation. This would amount to private nuisance.A reasonable person affected by such a noise level could not be said to be ‘unduly sensitive to noise’.

rejected: However, it does not sit easily with drones. Drone interference is often brief. It may consist of a brief hover, taking off or landing. Each incident on its own may be insufficient to demonstrate substantial or unreasonable interference. Yet, drone use can be frequent, especially at early morning or night. A nuisance may be established if such use causes a proven nuisance. Additionally, drones can be loud. Their noise levels can exceed those of an ordinary conversation. This amount may be enough for private nuisance. A reasonable person affected by the noise level may be unduly sensitive to the noise.

source_path: /Users/Mathieu/Desktop/Monash Law JD/SS_LAW5018/35709820_LAW5003 (Torts)_Assignment_T1_2026_FINAL.docx

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Reverses the unduly-sensitive point: the reference says the affected person could not be said to be unduly sensitive; the output says they may be unduly sensitive. It also adds “proven nuisance”.

voice_clone29_machine_failed_gates: eval audit

must_preserve_polarity_terms: exceeding not


content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Assignment
Source type: assignment

SOURCE NOTES:
- It include landholder use enjoyment land noise vibration pollution
- Whereas unreasonableness is judged objectively
- It involves balancing rights neighbours ordinary people tolerate
- It requires assessment nature extent interference public interest
- Material and non material damages must also be considered
- Non Material Damage Greater difficulty arises physical damage
- This is the most common form of drone interference
- Drones interfere noise persistent hovering causing apprehension

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: may also include harm to a landholder's use and enjoyment of land by noise | vibration | or air pollution
- atom 2: unreasonableness is judged objectively
- atom 3: it involves balancing the rights of neighbours | and asks what ordinary people should tolerate
- atom 4: also requires assessment of the nature and extent | the harm or interference | and the public interest
- atom 5: material and non-material damages must also be considered
- atom 6: greater difficulty arises where there is no physical damage
- atom 7: is the most common form of drone interference
- atom 8: drones may interfere by noise | persistent hovering | or by causing apprehension

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: It include landholder use enjoyment land noise vibration pollution

notes: It involves balancing rights neighbours ordinary people tolerate

notes: It requires assessment nature extent interference public interest

notes: Material and non material damages must also be considered

notes: Non Material Damage Greater difficulty arises physical damage

notes: Drones interfere noise persistent hovering causing apprehension

notes: may also include harm to a landholder's use and enjoyment of land by noise | vibration | or air pollution

notes: it involves balancing the rights of neighbours | and asks what ordinary people should tolerate

notes: also requires assessment of the nature and extent | the harm or interference | and the public interest

notes: material and non-material damages must also be considered

notes: greater difficulty arises where there is no physical damage

notes: drones may interfere by noise | persistent hovering | or by causing apprehension

reference: It may also include harm to a landholder’s use and enjoyment of land by noise, vibration, or air pollution. Whereas unreasonableness is judged objectively. It involves balancing the rights of neighbours, and asks what ordinary people should tolerate. It also requires assessment of the nature and extent, the harm or interference, and the public interest. Material and non-material damages must also be considered. Non-Material Damage Greater difficulty arises where there is no physical damage. This is the most common form of drone interference. Drones may interfere by noise, persistent hovering, or by causing apprehension.

rejected: It does not include landholder’s use or enjoyment of the land, noise or vibration, or pollution. Whereas, unreasonableness is judged objectively. It involves balancing the rights of the neighbours against what ordinary people can be expected to tolerate. It requires an assessment of the nature and extent of the interference and its impact on the public interest. Material and non-material damages must also be considered. Non-Material Damage Greater difficulty arises from physical damage. This is the most common form of drone interference. Drones interfere with noise, which is persistent and caused by hovering, and which may cause apprehension.

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Machine-clean but materially wrong. It reverses “may include harm to use and enjoyment” into “does not include”, and changes “where there is no physical damage” into “from physical damage”.


category: Advice

source_type: other

content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Advice
Source type: other

SOURCE NOTES:
- Whether location appearance proposed building adversely affect significance heritage place
- Whether location appearance proposed building keeping character appearance adjacent buildings heritage place
- During formulation masterplan Architect regards relationship building Church harmonious respectful design outcome

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: whether the location | bulk | form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place
- atom 2: whether the location | bulk | form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place
- atom 3: the formulation of the masterplan | the Architect should have regards to the relationship of any new building to the Church and aim for a harmonious/respectful design outcome

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: Whether location appearance proposed building adversely affect significance heritage place

notes: Whether location appearance proposed building keeping character appearance adjacent buildings heritage place

notes: During formulation masterplan Architect regards relationship building Church harmonious respectful design outcome

notes: whether the location | bulk | form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place

notes: whether the location | bulk | form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place

notes: the formulation of the masterplan | the Architect should have regards to the relationship of any new building to the Church and aim for a harmonious/respectful design outcome

reference: Whether the location, bulk, form or appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place. Whether the location, bulk, form and appearance of the proposed building is in keeping with the character and appearance of adjacent buildings and the heritage place. During the formulation of the masterplan, the Architect should have regards to the relationship of any new building to the Church and aim for a harmonious/respectful design outcome.

rejected: Whether the location and appearance of the proposed building will adversely affect the significance of the heritage place? Whether the location and appearance of the proposed building will keep the character and appearance of adjacent buildings within the heritage place. During the formulation of the masterplan, the Architect regards the relationship between the new building and the Church as a harmonious and respectful design outcome.

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Machine-clean but not source-clean. It drops bulk and form, changes the second “whether” test into “will keep”, and converts the architect instruction into a conclusion that the relationship is harmonious.


content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Advice
Source type: other

SOURCE NOTES:
- Exactly Schedule limit building height proposed development encroach helicopter flight
- A permit required construct building carry works result height building referral height 110.8 metres Australian Height Datum AHD
- The Determining Referral Authority Department Health DH building works exceeding height

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: this Schedule limit the building height of any proposed development so as not to encroach in the helicopter flight path
- atom 2: a permit is not required to construct a building or to carry out works that would result in the height of the building being less than the referral height | being 110.8 metres above the Australian Height Datum (AHD)
- atom 3: the Determining Referral Authority will be the Department of Health (DH) for any building and works exceeding this height

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: Exactly Schedule limit building height proposed development encroach helicopter flight

notes: A permit required construct building carry works result height building referral height 110.8 metres Australian Height Datum AHD

notes: The Determining Referral Authority Department Health DH building works exceeding height

notes: a permit is not required to construct a building or to carry out works that would result in the height of the building being less than the referral height | being 110.8 metres above the Australian Height Datum (AHD)

notes: the Determining Referral Authority will be the Department of Health (DH) for any building and works exceeding this height

reference: Exactly like above, this Schedule limit the building height of any proposed development so as not to encroach in the helicopter flight path. A permit is not required to construct a building or to carry out works that would result in the height of the building being less than the referral height, being 110.8 metres above the Australian Height Datum (AHD). The Determining Referral Authority will be the Department of Health (DH) for any building and works exceeding this height.

rejected: Exactly, per the Schedule, limit the building’s height to what is proposed for the development and do not encroach on helicopter flight paths. A permit is required to construct a building, carry out works that will result in the height of a building being more than 110.8 metres above the Australian Height Datum (AHD). The Determining Referral Authority is the Department of Health (DH). building and works exceeding height •   …

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Machine-clean but malformed. It changes the negative permit threshold into a different formulation and leaves a broken tail: “building and works exceeding height • …”.

must_preserve_polarity_terms:
above
exceeding
less than
not


category: Submission / objection

source_type: objection

content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Submission / objection
Source type: objection

SOURCE NOTES:
- Ratio vehicle movement survey Appendix 1 suggest Reay Road currently exceeds typical capacity generation vehicle movements 4 263
- Such figure 110 maximum capacity comparative local streets
- As identified Table 8.1 Total Development Traffic Generation development expected generate order 102 vehicle movements site AM PM periods 50 inbound 51 outbound

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: ratio's vehicle movement survey at Appendix 1, suggest that Reay Road currently exceeds its typical capacity | generation vehicle movements 4,263 vpd
- atom 2: such a figure is 110% above its maximum capacity and comparative local streets
- atom 3: as identified in Table 8.1:Total Development Traffic Generation | the development is expected to generate in the order of 102 vehicle movements to/from the site during each of the AM and PM peak hour periods | being 50 vpd inbound and 51 vpd outbound

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: Ratio vehicle movement survey Appendix 1 suggest Reay Road currently exceeds typical capacity generation vehicle movements 4 263

notes: Such figure 110 maximum capacity comparative local streets

notes: As identified Table 8.1 Total Development Traffic Generation development expected generate order 102 vehicle movements site AM PM periods 50 inbound 51 outbound

notes: ratio's vehicle movement survey at Appendix 1, suggest that Reay Road currently exceeds its typical capacity | generation vehicle movements 4,263 vpd

notes: such a figure is 110% above its maximum capacity and comparative local streets

notes: as identified in Table 8.1:Total Development Traffic Generation | the development is expected to generate in the order of 102 vehicle movements to/from the site during each of the AM and PM peak hour periods | being 50 vpd inbound and 51 vpd outbound

reference: Ratio’s vehicle movement survey at Appendix 1, suggest that Reay Road currently exceeds its typical capacity, generation vehicle movements 4,263 vpd. Such a figure is 110% above its maximum capacity and comparative local streets. As identified in Table 8.1:Total Development Traffic Generation, the development is expected to generate in the order of 102 vehicle movements to/from the site during each of the AM and PM peak hour periods, being 50 vpd inbound and 51 vpd outbound.

rejected: Ratio of vehicle movement survey at Appendix 1 suggest that Reay Road currently exceeds typical capacity (generation of vehicle movements by lot): 4,263 Such a figure is 110% of the maximum capacity for a comparative local street. As identified in Table 8.1, the Total Development will be expected to generate around 102 net vehicle movements to the site in the AM and PM peak periods (50 inbound and 51 outbound).

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Machine-clean but materially altered: “110% above maximum capacity” becomes “110% of maximum capacity”, and “102 vehicle movements” becomes “102 net vehicle movements”.

must_preserve_polarity_terms: above exceeds


category: Email / informal professional correspondence

source_type: email

content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Email / informal professional correspondence
Source type: email

SOURCE NOTES:
- Until benefit reviewing approved documents remains bound requirements construction EPA policy guideline statutory weight

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: until we have the benefit of reviewing all approved documents | my view remains that we are not bound by any requirements for construction time and days | other than the EPA policy guideline which has no statutory weight

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: Until benefit reviewing approved documents remains bound requirements construction EPA policy guideline statutory weight

notes: until we have the benefit of reviewing all approved documents | my view remains that we are not bound by any requirements for construction time and days | other than the EPA policy guideline which has no statutory weight

reference: Until we have the benefit of reviewing all approved documents, my view remains that we are not bound by any requirements for construction time and days, other than the EPA policy guideline which has no statutory weight.

rejected: Until then, benefit reviewing will be bound by the same disclosure requirements as under the normal construction of EPA’s policy and guideline and should carry no more statutory weight.

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Unreadable and legally reversed. The reference says the view remains that the client is not bound except by non-statutory EPA guidance; the output says benefit reviewing will be bound.

voice_clone29_machine_failed_gates: eval lock audit source_matched

must_preserve_polarity_terms: no not


content:
Write in Mathieu's voice. Use the shared Mathieu core and the requested category register. The source notes are the boundary of the answer. Do not invent names, authorities, clauses, dates, property details, quotations, or facts that are not present in the notes. Avoid generic AI phrasing and do not polish the text into a generic professional style.

Never compress the legal analysis. Step out each legal principle, each element, and each step of any test clearly, even where that makes the answer longer.

Do not combine legal tests into smoothed prose. If a test has steps, identify and apply each step.

Source atoms are binding. Preserve each stated legal/factual proposition, including negation, numbers, percentages, dates, thresholds, qualifiers, and comparisons. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or turn atoms into a checklist. If compressed source notes conflict with source atoms, the source atoms control.

Do not use the source atoms as a checklist or heading list. Convert them into complete prose, but do not reverse, soften, or copy them.

content:
Category: Email / informal professional correspondence
Source type: email

SOURCE NOTES:
- For examples titles states easement favour Lots LP 9554 original subdivision
- A survey Council easements school site

TASK:
Draft one complete, finished passage in Mathieu's voice using only the source notes. Start with a complete authored sentence, not a copied source-note fragment. Preserve the category register and Mathieu's sentence structure. Do not add unsupported facts. Do not use generic AI phrasing. Write in prose, with no bullet markers, colon-list structures, hyphenated slug openings, or task-restatement openings.

SOURCE ATOMS - BINDING SOURCE FIDELITY LOCK:
- atom 1: for examples | of the titles states that the easement is in favour of Lots in LP 9554 (the original subdivision plan)
- atom 2: a dial before you dig survey did not show any Council easements on the school site

Before finalising, silently check that every number, threshold, negation, comparison and qualifier from the source atoms survives in the final prose. Do not copy the held-out reference wording or sentence order.

notes: For examples titles states easement favour Lots LP 9554 original subdivision

notes: for examples | of the titles states that the easement is in favour of Lots in LP 9554 (the original subdivision plan)

notes: a dial before you dig survey did not show any Council easements on the school site

reference: For examples, of the titles states that the easement is in favour of Lots in LP 9554 (the original subdivision plan). A dial before you dig survey did not show any Council easements on the school site.

rejected:
For the examples’ titles, they states an easement in favour of Lots LP9554 of the original subdivision. A survey of Council’s easements over a school site

[authored] A survey of Council’s easements over a school site would be needed.

voice_clone29_direct_reason: Machine almost lets this through, but the prose is malformed, leaks “[authored]”, and invents a need for a further survey rather than preserving the note.