I'm no lawyer, but CASA's insistance on "strict liability" clauses in virtually every regulation they produce makes a pilot's position quite clear. If you have an accident, and a possible/probable cause of the accident was a breach of a "strict liability" regulation, then you are in serious trouble.
Now the minutes of a RAPAC meeting do not constitue a strict liability regulation.
But if you do ding one in operating outside of the available performance data, and CASA believe that that was a contributing factor (and I'm sure they will try hard to do so), then you may fall foul of one of their "strict liability" regulations unless you can prove some reasonable means of compliance (kind of making you guilty unless you can prove innocent, which goes against most modern legal justice systems).
But also, don't ask a question unless you already know and like the answer. What else did they expect CASA to say: eg "yeah, no worries, just take off anyway, just don't ding it in..."
I'm sure a Pprune bush lawyer will pick apart what I've put, but that's my basic interpretation.