Page 6050 - Week 14 - Thursday, 9 December 2010
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
While this proposal was put forward by the Law Society and the Bar Association and others, the Law Society and Bar Association linked this proposal with a requirement for an additional significant change. Those parties proposed that all summary matters should have full rehearing rights in the Supreme Court. The government does not support the introduction of a right to rehearing of all criminal matters coming before the Magistrates Court. This would be likely to significantly undermine the government’s attempt to reduce the pressure on the Supreme Court. While this type of appeal appears to be working quickly and efficiently within the New South Wales District Court, which has procedures in place to deliver fast justice to litigants, there can be no guarantee that this experience would be replicated in a superior court of record such as the ACT Supreme Court.
In addition to amending the definition of indictable offence, the bill also increases the civil jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court. The government proposes to increase the civil jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court to a $250,000 threshold from the current threshold of only $50,000. The cumulative effect of this change will be that the Supreme Court will generally hear the civil claims with the most significant outcomes, such as major medical negligence claims.
In addition to the legislative reform and other measures already implemented by the government, I have jointly, with the acting chief justice, requested a review of case management in the ACT Supreme Court. The review will examine listing practices and consider practices adopted in the other jurisdictions, including docket and reserved trial practices. This review will be undertaken by Her Honour Justice Hilary Penfold and the chief executive of my department, Ms Kathy Leigh. It will be assisted by a reference group consisting of senior members of the ACT Bar Association, the ACT Law Society, the ACT Legal Aid Commission and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. I am particularly grateful that His Honour Acting Justice Bernard Teague AO will assist the review while he is an acting judge of the ACT Supreme Court.
These measures go some way to reducing the backlog of cases and number of outstanding reserve judgements in the Supreme Court.
The government is committed to continuous improvement of the justice system in the territory and will continue to deliver reforms to achieve this goal.
In addition to the measures related to the 2010 access to justice initiative, the Courts Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 contains two other important reforms. The bill formally establishes in legislation the Family Violence Court and the Galambany Court.
I announced on White Ribbon Day this year that the ACT will have a dedicated Family Violence Court to further protect some of the most vulnerable people in the ACT community. The effect of the bill is to give statutory recognition to the family violence list created by the Magistrates Court. Legislating for a specialised Family Violence Court acknowledges the specialisation and inspiration of the Family Violence Court and recognises the complexities, vulnerabilities and special interests in protection of individual victims and the community as a whole.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video