The Andrews government is opening itself up to a range of potential lawsuits – including class actions – from people abused in state-run schools, orphanages and detention centres, lawyers say.

The state introduced a law on Tuesday abolishing current time limits to making compensation claims against a person or an organisation for child abuse. If passed, it will destroy what is widely considered the main legal barrier to victims receiving compensation from the institutions in which they were abused, following a recommendation from the Betrayal of Trust report of the state's inquiry on child sexual abuse.

Lawyers who specialise in historic child abuse say most new claims are likely to be made against the Victorian government for abuse inflicted on state wards. Other legal barriers, they say, still prevent victims from suing religious organisations such as the Catholic Church.

Lawyer Angela Sdrinis said that while potential claims will depend on the details in the law, it "opens the capacity to sue the state, including wards of the state, people abused in public schools, even possibly in relation to children abused in detention."

Dr Viv Waller said people could also potentially sue their parents, step-parents and grandparents for child abuse. They could also sue public schools for teachers' physical abuse.

"Beating children severely has always been a crime. Even in the '60s there were standards for how corporal punishment was to be administered," Dr Waller said.

Sexual and physical abuse were often linked, particularly in children's homes, where victims were beaten so they would be less inclined to seek help, she said: "It's all about controlling the kids and keeping them quiet."

Child abuse victims often take decades to acknowledge their abuse, by which time it is often too late under current law to claim compensation for their suffering. Currently, civil claims must be brought within either six years of the date victims realise they were abused or 12 years from the date of the alleged abuse, whichever is earlier.

Children's lawyer Andrew McGregor likened the challenge before the state to fund compensation for child abuse to that of James Hardie's promise to pay all its asbestos victims, with class actions for historical child abuse against the state likely.

Reforms which last year reduced the number of times children in care will come into contact with the Children's Court, could also give rise to future claims of child abuse, he said.

"Victoria may have to be a little cautious with regard to how deep its pockets are if it lessens the day-to-day scrutiny to care provided children in the Department [of Health and Human Services'] care at the same time as saying it will extend the period they will take action for damages in cases where state is negligent."

Yet other legal barriers, including the so-called Ellis defence – a court decision that prevents victims suing churches' property trusts for child abuse – still existed for victims wanting to sue religious institutions where they were abused, Dr Waller said.

A spokeswoman for Attorney-General Mr Pakula said the Victorian government did not rely on time limits in child abuse claims and only applied the limitation defence to state ward claims of physical abuse "in outstanding circumstances". Since 2014, when such guiding principles were published, "there has not been any noticeable increase in claims against the state."