Page 3348 - Week 09 - Wednesday, 19 August 2009
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
In delivering his judgement, Mr Justice Heydon made the general observation that the legal fraternity and the Supreme Court of the ACT are “in a strange alliance” and that—and I am quoting again—“the torpid languor of one hand washes the drowsy procrastination of the other”.
This may be contrasted with the article that appeared on the front page of today’s Canberra Times, which suggested the Supreme Court was overworked and in a state of crisis as “justices scramble to stay ahead of their workloads”.
Attorney, how have you allowed this crisis to occur? Do you accept the High Court’s assessment? What are you doing to fix these issues?
MR CORBELL: I reject the assertion that there is any link between workloads in the Supreme Court and the decision in Aon v ANU. The decision in Aon v ANU relates to the failure, as perceived by the High Court, of the judge hearing that matter to dismiss the application on the day of the application. Basically, the High Court concluded that the presiding judge made an error in not rejecting the application when it was made in the court on that day and obviously criticised the fact that it took 11 months for that matter to be resolved.
The decision in Aon v ANU highlights the fact that our courts need to be more mindful of whether late applications to change the claims made—in this case, civil litigation—should be entertained. That is effectively what Aon v ANU determined in that matter. I reject the link. There is no suggestion that there is a lack of resources that led to that error. It was an error on the part of the presiding judge and that matter has been corrected on appeal in the High Court, as it should be. I am confident that the Supreme Court will have very close and due regard to the decisions of the High Court, given that it is the ultimate court of appeal on these matters.
In relation to the workload of the Supreme Court, members would be aware that the Chief Justice has made representations to me in relation to consideration being given to the appointment of a fifth resident judge. I would draw to the attention of the Assembly the fact that the ACT, outside of the Northern Territory, currently has the highest number of judicial officers per head of population of any jurisdiction in the country. That said, I am giving consideration to the Chief Justice’s request and I will be communicating a decision to him shortly on that matter.
MR SPEAKER: Mrs Dunne, a supplementary question?
MRS DUNNE: Minister, what actions will you and your government be taking to ensure that community safety and community confidence in the Supreme Court are realised and that releasing alleged criminals on bail because trials cannot come to court in reasonable time is not a thing of the future?
MR CORBELL: Community safety is always a consideration on the part of a judge when deciding whether or not applications for bail should be agreed to. That is already a consideration and I am confident that our judges have due regard to community safety in looking at those matters. Beyond that, it is not appropriate for me to comment on the general decision making of the Supreme Court. Those are matters properly for the court.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .