Chapter 1 - Annual reports of statutory authorities

1.1        The following reports of statutory authorities for the financial year 2005-06 were referred to the committee for examination and report:

• Administrative Review Council;
• Australian Law Reform Commission;
• Copyright Agency Limited;
• Family Court of Australia;
• Federal Court of Australia.
• High Court of Australia; and
• Migration Agents Registration Authority;

1.2        The committee decided to examine the annual reports of the courts in detail in this report.

Federal Court of Australia (Federal Court)

1.3        In its report, the Federal Court cited a range of information technology initiatives taken to improve its operation and accessibility.[1] These initiatives included improving the eCourt case management system which allows people to search for case information through the Federal Court's website.[2] As the report notes, the eSearch facility averaged 16,000 hits per month, a considerable number, which demonstrates the utility of the website.[3] On a related issued, the committee commends the Federal Court on having its website ranked in the top ten court websites in the world.[4]

1.4        The committee paid particular attention to the report's section outlining the Federal Court's performance against time standards.[5] The timeliness of decisions by Commonwealth courts was the subject of questioning from the committee in the recent Budget 2007-08 Estimates round.[6] The committee notes that the Federal Court sets benchmarks for the completion of cases within specified timeframes and has exceeded these in the previous three years.[7]

1.5        During the recent Budget Estimates round, the committee also questioned Commonwealth courts on their procedures for handling complaints and allegations of professional misconduct by judges.[8] The committee continues to have an interest in these issues. For the reporting period, the Federal Court reported only 23 complaints in relation to its procedures, rules, forms, timeliness or courtesy to users.[9]

Family Court of Australia (Family Court)

1.6        In its report for 2005-06, the Family Court included comprehensive information on client feedback and complaints management.[10] The committee found this section to be of considerable use. The committee was pleased to see that the Family Court had undertaken significant work to implement the recommendations of Audit Report No. 46 2003-04.[11] The report made a number of recommendations to improve the operation of the Family Court and the Federal Magistrates Court.[12] Of particular interest to the committee was recommendation number 2. This recommendation made a number of suggestions on how the Family Court could improve its complaint handling procedures, all of which were agreed to by the Family Court.[13]

1.7        In its annual report, the Family Court reported significant progress in implementing the Auditor-General's recommendations.[14] The committee notes these successes and in particular that complaints have fallen by 26.3 per cent in 2005-06 when compared to the previous financial year. The Family Court also provided information on how complaints regarding judicial conduct and/or delays in reserved judgements are handled.[15]

High Court of Australia (High Court)

1.8        In its report, the High Court provided comprehensive and detailed information on the workload of the court.[16] Of interest to the committee were details of the time taken from filing to hearing of matters, as well as the time taken to finalise matters. The committee is pleased to note that these times have been reduced.[17]

1.9        The number of self represented litigants was also of interest to the committee during the previous Budget Estimates round.[18] During the reporting period, the High Court reported an increase in the numbers of self-represented litigants which in turn placed high demands on registry staff.[19] The report notes the new High Court Rules which commenced on 1 January 2005, changed the procedures governing applications for leave or special leave to appeal by self-represented litigants. The committee was pleased to see that these changes had resulted in the court being able to determine more applications during the reporting period than the previous year.[20]

1.10      As previously noted, the committee maintains an interest in the complaint handling procedures of courts. The committee believes that a short summary of the number and nature of complaints (if any) made to the court would be informative and helpful.

Navigation: Previous Page | Contents | Next Page