Annual Report 15 / 16 15/16 Family Australia of Court

ANNUAL REPORT 15 / 16 15/16 FAMILY AUSTRALIA OF COURT

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16

ANNUAL REPORT ISSN: 1035–9060 (print version) ISSN: 2203–1863 (online version) © Commonwealth of Australia 2016

The Family Court of Australia provides all material (unless otherwise noted and with the exception of the Coat of Arms) with Creative Commons (CC) Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported licensing. Material may be distributed, as long as it remains unchanged and the Family Court of Australia is credited as the creator. More information can be found at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/. If you have any questions about Creative Commons or licensing generally, please email [email protected]

Enquiries If you would like to comment on this annual report, or have any queries, please contact: National Communication Family Court and Federal Circuit Court GPO Box 9991 CANBERRA ACT 2601 Ph: +61 2 6243 8690 Fax: +61 2 6243 8737 Email: [email protected]

Alternative formats This annual report is available electronically at: http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/reports-and-publications/annual-reports/ The online version contains links to the 2015–16 Attorney-General’s Portfolio Budget Statements.

Acknowledgments This report reflects the efforts of many people. Special thanks go to the Court staff involved in contributing and coordinating material, as well as the following specialist contractor: Printing: New Millennium Print This annual report is printed on 130gsm Monza satin recycled and 300gsm Monza satin recycled. Monza recycled contains 55% recycled fibre and is FSC® mix certified, which ensures that all virgin pulp is derived from well-managed forests and controlled sources. Monza recycled is manufactured by an ISO 14001 certified mill. LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 iii CONTENTS

Letter of transmittal III Reader’s guide X Acronyms and abbreviations XI Glossary of court-specific terms XIII

1 THE COURT’S YEAR IN REVIEW 2015–16 1 Highlights 3 Changes from 1 July 2016 4 Workload issues 5 Appeals 5 Judicial appointments 5 Community engagement 6

2 OVERVIEW OF THE COURT 11 About the Court 12 Portfolio Budget Statements outcome and program 13 Court service locations 16 Information technology initiatives 18 Registry services initiatives 24 Internal communication initiatives 26 International Framework for Court Excellence 28 Child Dispute Services 29 Access and inclusion 31 International cooperation 33

3 REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE 39 Annual Performance Statement – Judicial services 40 Introductory statement 40 Family Court of Australia purpose 40 Results 40 Performance criterion 40 Criterion source 42 Result against performance criterion 42 Analysis of performance against purpose 43 National coverage as appellate court 55 Social justice and equity impacts 55 Annual Performance Statement – Registry services 59 Introductory statement 59

iv FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA Family Court and Federal Circuit Court entity purpose 59 Results 59 Performance criterion 59 Criterion source 60 Result against performance criterion 60 Analysis of performance against purpose 61 Client feedback and complaints management 65

4 APPEALS 69 Annual Performance Statement 70 Introductory statement 70 Family Court of Australia purpose 70 Results 70 Performance criterion 70 Criterion source 71 Result against performance criterion 71 Analysis of performance against purpose 73

5 SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS 83 Janssen & Janssen 84 Ghazel & Ghazel and Anor 86 Medlow & Medlow 88 Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services & Padwa 89 Faukland & Shikia 91

6 MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY 95 Corporate governance 96 Judicial officers of the Family Court of Australia 98 Judges assigned to the Appeal Division 99 Judges 99 Appointments, retirements and resignations 101 Senior executives 102 Judicial committees reporting 104 Judicial committee highlights 106 Collaborative committees 113 Senior management committees 114 Corporate and operational planning and associated performance reporting and review 116 Internal audit 117 Risk management 118 Financial risk 118 Fraud prevention and control 118 Information Publication Scheme 119

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 v Ethical standards 120 Management and accountability 120 Service Charter and Service Commitments 121 Feedback and service improvements 122 Compliance reporting 122 External and internal scrutiny 122 External evaluations 124 Internal evaluations 124 Management of human resources 125 Workforce planning, retention and turnover 126 Workforce turnover 132 Agreement making 133 Training, learning and development 134 Disability reporting 136 Productivity gains 137 Financial management 137 Purchasing, consultants and contracts 142 Assets and property management 143 Correction of errors in 2014–15 report 145

7 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 147 Index to the financial statements 148

8 APPENDIXES 197 Appendix one 198 Appendix two 199 Appendix three 200 Appendix four 210 Appendix five 213 Appendix six 214 Appendix seven 218 Appendix eight 219 Appendix nine 224 Appendix ten 236 Appendix eleven 250 Appendix twelve 256

9 INDEXES 261 List of requirements 262 Alphabetical index 269

vi FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Family Court of Australia service locations 16 Table 2.2 Registered users of the Commonwealth Courts Portal, 2012–13 to 2015–16 19 Table 2.3 Documents eFiled in the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, 2012–13 to 2015–16 19 Table 3.1 Key performance indictors – judicial services, 2015–16 42 Table 3.2 Summary of performance against judicial services KPIs, 2011–12 to 2015–16 42 Table 3.3 Appeal caseload, 2011–12 to 2015–16 55 Table 3.4 Key performance indictors – registry services, 2015–16 60 Table 3.5 Summary of performance against registry services KPIs, 2011–12 to 2015–16 61 Table 3.6 National Enquiry Centre performance, 2011–12 to 2015–16 64 Table 4.1 Notice of Appeals filed, finalised and pending by jurisdiction, 2011–12 to 2015–16 74 Table 4.2 Other applications filed in appeal cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16 75 Table 6.1 Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure 138 Table 6.2 Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure 140 Table 8.1 Entity Resource Statement 2015–16 198 Table 8.2 Expenses for Outcome 1 199 Table 8.3 Staff by location 200 Table 8.4 Staff by gender 201 Table 8.5 Staff by attendance status 202 Table 8.6 Ongoing staff by location and classification 203 Table 8.7 Non-ongoing staff by location and classification 203 Table 8.8 Indigenous staff by location, gender and employment status 204 Table 8.9 Total number of judges, 30 June 2015 204 Table 8.10 Workforce turnover 205 Table 8.11 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court employees covered by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014 206 Table 8.12 Employees covered by other agreements 207 Table 8.13 AWA minimum and maximum salary ranges by classification 208 Table 8.14 Classification structure and pay rates in accordance with the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014 209 Table 8.15 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court environmental impact/usage data, 2012–13 to 2015–16 214

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 vii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1 The outcome and program of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court 41 Figure 3.2 Summary workload by application type, 2015–16 43 Figure 3.3 Issues sought on Final Order cases filed, 2015–16 44 Figure 3.4 Attrition and settlement trend in the Court’s caseload, 2011–12 to 2015–16 45 Figure 3.5 Cases finalised at first instance trial, 2011–12 to 2015–16 46 Figure 3.6 Final orders applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16 47 Figure 3.7 Applications in a case, 2011–12 to 2015–16 47 Figure 3.8 Consent orders applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16 48 Figure 3.9 All applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16 48 Figure 3.10 All applications, clearance rates, 2011–12 to 2015–16 49 Figure 3.11 Age of pending applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16 50 Figure 3.12 All applications, time pending, 2011–12 to 2015–16 50 Figure 3.13 Reserved judgments outstanding (pending) less than three months, as at 30 June 2011–12 to 2015–16 51 Figure 3.14 Time for reserved judgments outstanding (pending), at 30 June 2011–12 to 2015–16 51 Figure 3.15 Applications finalised within 12 months, 2011–12 to 2015–16 52 Figure 3.16 All applications, time to finalise, 2011–12 to 2015–16 53 Figure 3.17 Reserved judgments delivered within three months, 2011–12 to 2015–16 (all reserved judgments) 53 Figure 3.18 Time to deliver reserved judgments, 2011–12 to 2015–16 (all reserved judgments) 54 Figure 3.19 Total judicial services complaints, 2011–12 to 2015–16 54 Figure 3.20 Proportion of litigants’ representation status, finalised cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16 56 Figure 3.21 Proportion of litigants’ representation status, at trials, 2011–12 to 2015–16 56 Figure 3.22 Notices of child abuse or risk of family violence filed, 2011–12 to 2015–16 57 Figure 3.23 Proportion of final order cases in which a notice of child abuse or risk of family violence is filed, 2011–12 to 2015–16 57 Figure 3.24 Magellan cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16 58 Figure 3.25 Administration complaints, 2015–16 66 Figure 4.1 The outcome and program of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court 71 Figure 4.2 Notice of appeals, 2011–12 to 2015–16 75 Figure 4.3 Proportion of notices of appeal filed by jurisdiction of decree, 2011–12 to 2015–16 76

viii FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA Figure 4.4 Notices of appeal finalised by type of finalisation, 2011–12 to 2015–16 76 Figure 4.5 Proportion of notices of appeal finalised by type of finalisation, 2011–12 to 2015–16 77 Figure 4.6 Proportion of appellants by gender, 2011–12 to 2015–16 77 Figure 4.7 Proportion of appellants’ representation status, 2011–12 to 2015–16 78 Figure 4.8 Months to finalise appeals, 2011–12 to 2015–16 78 Figure 6.1 Organisational structure of the Family Court of Australia, 30 June 2016 97 Figure 6.2 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure ($206.113 million), 2015–16 138 Figure 6.3 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure ($63.699 million), 2015–16 140

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 ix READER’S GUIDE

The purpose of this report is to inform the Attorney-General, the Parliament, court clients and the general public about the performance of the Family Court of Australia in the 2015–16 reporting year. Prepared according to parliamentary reporting requirements, this report outlines the goals stated in the Court’s Portfolio Budget Statements and relates them to the results achieved during the year. PART 1: The year in review—the Chief Justice’s overview highlighting significant issues and initiatives the Court has undertaken during the reporting year. PART 2: Overview of the Court—information about the Court, including its role, functions, powers, governance, organisational structure, initiatives, planning and international cooperation. PART 3: Report on performance—how the Court performed during the period against the above outcome and related program. The performance reports are based on the outcome and program framework and performance information in the 2015–16 Portfolio Budget Statements and the Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements 2015–16 for the Attorney-General’s portfolio. PART 4: Appeals—information about the Appeal Division, trends in appeals and appeals to the High Court. PART 5: Significant and noteworthy judgments—summaries of some of the important decisions made during 2015–16. PART 6: Management and accountability—information on corporate governance, external scrutiny, human resource management, financial management, purchasing, consultants and contract management, assets management and other activities relevant to the general administration of the Court. PART 7: Financial statements for the year ending 30 June 2016—the audited financial statements for 2015–16. PART 8: Appendices—the resource statement, resources for outcomes, staffing profile, work health and safety, advertising and market research, ecologically sustainable development and environmental performance, grant programs, committees, external involvement, judicial activities, international visitors and contact details. PART 9: Index and list of requirements The following should assist readers to locate information in the annual report and to understand court-specific language: >> Acronyms, abbreviations and a glossary of court-specific terminology—pages XI–XIII >> List of requirements—pages 262 >> Alphabetical index—pages 269

An electronic version of this annual report is available from the Family Court of Australia’s website at this link: http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/connect/fcoaweb/reports- and-publications/annual-reports/

x FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AAT Administrative Appeals Tribunal AGD Australian Government Attorney-General’s Department AHS After Hours Service ALS Aboriginal Legal Service AM Member of the Order of Australia ANAO Australian National Audit Office AO Officer of the Order of Australia APS Australian Public Service ASL Average Staffing Level ATSI Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander AUSTLII Australasian Legal Information Institute AWA Australian Workplace Agreement BAU Business as Usual BSDO Business Systems Development Officer CaLD Culturally and Linguistically Diverse CCP Commonwealth Courts Portal CDS Child Dispute Services CEI Chief Executive Instruction CEO Chief Executive Officer CJ Chief Justice CLC Commonwealth Law Courts CMAG Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group COMP Court Ordered Mediation Program CPC Chief Justice’s Court Policy Committee CPSU Commonwealth and Public Sector Union CSA Client Service Advice CSO Client Service Officer CSSMG Client Services Senior Managers Group Cth Commonwealth DCJ Deputy Chief Justice DHS Department of Human Services ECN Environmental Champions Network ECONET Ethics Contact Officer Network EDCS Executive Director Client Services EIU Early Intervention Unit EL Executive Level of the Australian Public Service EMS environmental management system

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 xi ESD ecologically sustainable development FAIM Fellow of the Australian Institute of Management FC Family Consultant FCA Federal Court of Australia FCC Federal Circuit Court of Australia FLCAG Family Law Courts Advisory Group FLIS Family Law Information Service FLPN Family Law Pathways Network FLSS Family Law Settlement Service FOI freedom of information FRAL Family Relationship Advice Line FRC Family Relationship Centre GST goods and services tax HR Human Resources HSMAs (Work) Health and safety management arrangements IACA International Association for Court Administration ICT information and communications technology IP Internet Protocol IPS information publication scheme ISDN Integrated Services for Digital Network IT information technology IVR interactive voice recognition J judge KPI Key Performance Indicator MA The Supreme Court of Indonesia (Mahkamah Agung) MOU Memorandum of Understanding NEC National Enquiry Centre NSO National Support Office PAC Chief Justice’s Policy Advisory Committee PBS Portfolio Budget Statements PGPA Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 PMDS Performance Management and Development System PSM Public Service Medal RMS Rehabilitation Management System RSR Registry Service Quarterly Return SDC Staff Development Committee SES Senior Executive Service of the Australian Public Service VOC volatile organic compounds WAN Wide Area Network WCAG Web Content Accessibility Guidelines WHS work health and safety WHSC Work Health and Safety Committee

xii FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA GLOSSARY OF COURT-SPECIFIC TERMS

Casetrack—Casetrack is the case management system used by the Family Court, including the Appeal Division, and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Child dispute services—the family consultant services of the courts. Family consultants are court experts who specialise in child and family issues after separation and divorce. They provide the courts and families with expert advice regarding children’s best interests; help parties resolve their dispute where possible; write and produce family reports; and advise the courts and families about the services provided to families and children by government, community and other agencies. The Court—means the Family Court of Australia. The courts—means the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Family consultant—a psychologist and/or social worker who specialises in child and family issues that may occur after separation and divorce. Family law registry—a public area at a family law court where people can obtain information about the courts and their processes and where parties file documents in relation to their case. Interim proceedings—proceedings for orders pending a final determination of the issues in dispute. Interlocutory proceedings—proceedings taken during the course of, and incidental to, a trial. Magellan—cases that come to the Family Court that involve allegations of sexual abuse and/or serious physical abuse of a child go into the Court’s Magellan program. Registrar—a court lawyer who has been delegated power to perform certain tasks; for example, grant divorces, sign consent orders and decide the next step in a case. Registry—how the courts’ offices are known. For example, the Melbourne registry is in the Commonwealth Law Courts building on William Street. Reserved judgments delivery time—the time between the hearing and the delivery of the judgment concerned. Rules—a set of directions that outlines court procedures and guidelines. The rules of the Family Court of Australia are the Family Law Rules 2004 and the rules of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia are the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 xiii

OVERVIEWTHE YEAR OF THE IN REVIEWCOURT

21 GOAL

The Court’s goal is to support families involved in complex family disputes by deciding matters according to law, promptly, courteously and effectively.

PURPOSE

The purpose of the Court, as Australia’s superior court in family law, is to: >> determine cases with the most complex law, facts and parties >> cover specialised areas in family law, and >> provide national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.

The core services of the Court are those that: >> are prescribed by legislation >> enable and support judges to determine cases, and >> meet duty of care requirements.

VISION

The Court’s vision provides for: >> putting children and families first in the design and delivery of services >> furthering functional family relationships after separation >> ensuring independence and impartiality in the judicial process >> having staff who are valued for providing quality service for families >> providing quality child dispute services for families, and >> being at the forefront of the development of services. HIGHLIGHTS

20,418 total applications filed 13,357 consent orders finalised 286,476 calls to the NEC

73,152 emails sent in response 354 to telephone enquiries appeals finalised

12,348 provisions of proof that divorces were granted

Growth in registered users of the counter enquiries Commonwealth Courts Portal of 217,628 51,022

Average 261 86,880 live chats per day divorce orders were printed and posted to clients 1390 first instance 244,122 judgments published documents eFiled 1

THE COURT’S YEAR IN REVIEW 2015–16

CHANGES FROM 1 JULY 2016

Before looking back upon the year, I would like to set out

THE YEAR IN REVIEW some significant changes that will occur as of 1 July 2016, when the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act 2016 (Cth) comes into effect. The main practical effect of the legislation will be the commencement of the Federal Court of Australia’s Corporate Services Unit which will be managed by the newly appointed Executive Director of Corporate Services. In addition, from 1 July, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia will assume responsibility for the operation of the registries and the National Enquiry Centre and will provide registry services to the Family Court The Honourable Chief Justice pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding which is Diana Bryant AO presently being drafted. Further changes include the retirement of Richard Foster as Chief Executive Officer of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court on 30 June 2016. The new legislation provides for a different model, which incorporates the roles of Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar into the one position. This position has been advertised and the recruitment process is underway. I would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge Mr Foster for his support and work as the Chief Executive Officer of the Court since his appointment in 2000. He has had a long and successful career in the public service, both in the state and federal jurisdictions, and that experience and corporate knowledge will be sorely missed. The establishment of a new court (the Federal Magistrates Court) exercising concurrent jurisdiction and not adequately funded put considerable pressure on the existing resources, which the courts were largely left to resolve themselves. Mr Foster successfully managed the merger of the administrations of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court in 2009 and has operated as Chief Executive Officer of both courts since that time. He has maintained a very professional approach to the role and has represented the Court and later both courts exceptionally well, particularly in relations with government and in Senate Estimates hearings over the years. On 30 June 2016, the Principal Registrar of the Family Court, Angela Filippello, will also retire after 28 years working for the Family Court, as her position merges into the new role of Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar. She has been with the Court from the time when responsibility for the administration moved from the Attorney-General’s Department to the Court in 1989. She has been involved in every phase of the legislative, judicial and case management processes since that time, and her corporate knowledge is without equal. She has also been responsible for the training and professional development of all the registrars of the Court, and her corporate knowledge and experience will very much be missed. As will be apparent, the Court is very much moving into a new phase after 1 July.

4 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 1

WORKLOAD ISSUES

The Court has seen a slight increase in filings over the past year, in respect of both final and interim applications. In addition, the work of the Court continues to be extremely demanding, with Family Court judges hearing the most complex and difficult family law matters involving allegations of family violence and/or child abuse; questions of international family law (relating to the Hague 1980 Child Abduction Convention and/or 1996 Child Protection Convention); applications related to special medical procedures (such as stage two treatment for gender dysphoria in children); and complex property matters including THE YEAR IN REVIEW those concerning accrued jurisdiction and third parties.

APPEALS

The number of appeals filed over the last financial year remained steady, though there was a 16 per cent increase in applications in an appeal. There was also a five per cent increase in the number of appeals in which litigants were unrepresented. Over the 2015–16 financial year, the Appeal Division disposed of 17 per cent more appeals from the Family Court than the previous year. Indeed, the disposals are higher than in the past five financial years, due to a concerted effort to reduce the number of pending appeals and to list older outstanding cases. Extra sittings were scheduled, particularly in Sydney, and two courts often sat simultaneously. Due to Justice Finn’s impending retirement on 3 July 2016, Justice May has taken over responsibility for the administration of the Appeal Division. On 10 December 2015, Justice Kent was appointed to the Appeal Division.

JUDICIAL APPOINTMENTS

Justice Catherine Carew was appointed to the Bench commencing on 7 March 2016 at the Brisbane registry, replacing Justice Graham Bell who retired on 27 February 2015. Justice Shane Gill commenced with the Court at the Canberra registry on 17 May 2016, replacing one of two vacancies that will arise in the second half of 2016 following the retirement of Deputy Chief Justice Faulks and Justice Finn.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 5 1

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

Family violence

In recent years, the Australian community has very appropriately become increasingly concerned about the issue of family violence. This concern is reflected in a number of inquiries that have been undertaken at the state and federal levels over the last financial year. The Inquiry into Domestic Violence in Australia, undertaken by the Senate Finance and THE YEAR IN REVIEW Public Administration References Committee, was finalised and the final report tabled on 20 August 2015. The Court made a written submission to the Inquiry. The final report of the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence was tabled in the Victorian Parliament on 30 March 2016, making 227 recommendations that were immediately accepted by the Victorian Government. The Court made a written submission, attended a ‘roundtable’ arranged by the Royal Commission and continues to be represented on Victorian committees concerned with overlapping issues affecting both state and federal courts. The South Australian Parliament’s Social Development Committee tabled the final report from its Inquiry into Domestic and Family Violence on 12 April 2016. As far as I am aware, the South Australian Government has not to date responded to these recommendations. The Court made a written submission to the Inquiry. These submissions were necessary to explain how family violence is dealt with in Commonwealth legislation, in the processes and practices of the Family Court and how it is reflected in the Court’s decisions, available publicly on AustLII. Also completed in the last year was the Australian Institute of Family Studies’ comprehensive Evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments, which showed among other things that 41 per cent of cases in the family courts now involve allegations of family violence, child abuse or both family violence and child abuse. It should also be noted that this statistic is related to data collected prior to the recent federal and state government investments in family violence education and front line services, which will likely also increase the numbers of family law cases involving allegations of family violence and/or child abuse. In June 2015, the Family Law Council published its Interim Report to the Attorney-General in Response to the First Two Terms of Reference on Families with Complex Needs and the Intersection of the Family Law and Child Protection Systems. The Council’s final report was due to the Attorney-General on 30 June 2016. The inquiries that have been undertaken are of value to the Court as we attempt to implement policies and procedures to improve past performance and ensure client safety. However, I must reiterate what I have said publicly in recent months about the need for the federal government of the day to provide additional funding to the courts dealing with family law, in order to enable them to better assist in the management of cases involving family violence. New initiatives are increasingly difficult to implement without appropriate resourcing.

6 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 1

Court User Satisfaction Survey 2015

February 2016 saw the publication of the courts’ User Satisfaction Survey 2015, which is one element of the commitment by the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court to the International Framework for Court Excellence. The survey involved 13 family law registries and was aimed at users in both courts in respect of family law, and general federal law in the Federal Circuit Court. Of the 1719 people who provided responses to the survey, 77 per cent reported overall satisfaction with their experience. THE YEAR IN REVIEW

Transparency

Family law cases are often referred to in the media. Such articles tend to report some but not all aspects of a particular case. Judgments of the Family Court are publicly available on AustLII. Section 121 of the Family Law Act prevents publication of an account of proceedings that would identify parties, children or witnesses and, accordingly, pseudonyms are allocated and a process of de-identification takes place prior to publication in order to ensure compliance with this section. Otherwise, the judgments are published unaltered.

A new era

We move into a new era from 1 July 2016. Financial statements will henceforth be prepared by the Federal Court of Australia and this is the last year in which the Family Court will be responsible for the family law registries. The Family Court has been responsible for operating the registries since the federal courts became self-supporting in 1990. The new arrangements, which will see the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court with separate and discrete budgets, will bring challenges and opportunities. One of the opportunities is to focus on the core work of the Court and utilise the Court’s resources to provide for the most efficient and efficacious disposition of cases and the Court is looking at how best to achieve this outcome.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 7 IN FOCUS

Australia–Japan collaboration

In her role as one of the Hague Network Judges for Australia, Justice Bennett has initiated and led a number of collaborative programs and activities between Japan and Australia. These initiatives have resulted in closer ties and a deeper understanding of the Japanese legal system and legal frameworks in order to facilitate speedier resolutions to Hague related matters.

Japan Co-Mediation Program Following the initial proposal led by Justice Bennett to build a family law mediation and electronic access resource between Japan and Australia, her Honour, joined by Justice Benjamin, implemented a proposal to create a system of bi-national co-mediators and social scientists who would be trained together in Japan; an online mediation service which would operate at little or no expense to users; and an online supervised access service which would be affordable to produce and use. The program was extended to include members of the Japanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japanese lawyers, and Australian legal practitioners with expertise in Hague matters. It has the full support of Chief Justice Bryant AO as well as the Australian Attorney-General’s Department which provided a special grant for the program. The overall objectives of the project were to: >> establish an integrated system for use in international child abduction and access cases between Japan and Australia, and >> enable children whose parents live across international borders to know both their parents where it is in the child’s best interests to do so, in an atmosphere of enhanced awareness by each country of the other country’s laws, cultural values and social conventions.

Image: The Honourable Justice Robert Benjamin AM (front row, fifth from the left) with participants of the Japan Co-Mediation Program In September 2015 the Australian delegation travelled to Japan for co-training. The Australian participants were: >> The Honourable Justice Robert Benjamin AM (Family Court of Australia) >> Dr Ben Jones (Family Court of Australia/Federal Circuit Court of Australia) >> Ms Paule Eckhaus (Family Court of Australia/Federal Circuit Court of Australia) >> Ms April O’Mara (Family Court of Australia/Federal Circuit Court of Australia) >> Ms Deborah Fry (Family Court of Australia/Federal Circuit Court of Australia) >> Ms Freia Carlton (Victoria Legal Aid) >> Mr Walter Ibbs (Victoria Legal Aid) >> Ms Jill Raby (Victoria Legal Aid) >> Ms Lynette Hill (Legal Aid Western Australia) >> Ms Helen Freris (International Social Service) >> Ms Kay Hardefeldt (International Social Service) >> Ms Mary Louise Hatch (Relationships Australia Victoria) >> Ms Amanda Humphreys (Kennedy Partners), and >> Mr Maurice Edwards (Watts McCray Lawyers).

The training was conducted by Eberhard Carl, former International Hague Network Judge and Judge of the Regional Superior Court at Frankfurt/Main, Germany, and Sybille Kiesewetter, a psychologist, mediator and trainer who co-edited the handbook Cross-Border Family Mediation: International Parental Child Abduction, Custody and Access Cases (Wolfgang Metzner Verlag, 2nd ed, 2014). The Australia–Japan co-mediation program is the first of its kind in the world and serves as a pilot project that will assist bilateral processes between other Asian states using the structure that has been created as a broad geopolitical resource.

Further association between Japan and Australia In June 2016 through the collaborative efforts of this program, Justice Bennett organised for Ms Caroline Smith, Independent Children’s Lawyer, Victoria Legal Aid, to participate in the Asia Pacific Symposium on the 1980 Hague Convention in Tokyo, Japan. Ms Smith presented on the unique role of independent children’s lawyers and the valuable role that they play in the family law system. On 14 April 2016 a lunch was hosted by Ms Keiko Haneda, Consul General of Japan, in honour of Justice Bennett, recognising the collaboration and cooperation her Honour has initiated between our two countries. OVERVIEW OF THE COURT 2

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW

11 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT

ABOUT THE COURT

The Family Court of Australia, through its specialist judges and staff, resolves the most complex family disputes. The Family Court of Australia is a superior court of record established by Parliament in 1975 OVERVIEW OF THE COURT under Chapter III of the Constitution. It commenced operations on 5 January 1976 and consists of a Chief Justice, a Deputy Chief Justice and other judges. The Court maintains registries in all Australian states and territories except Western Australia.

Goal

The Court’s goal is to support families involved in complex family disputes by deciding matters according to law, promptly, courteously and effectively.

Purpose

The core services of the Court are those that: >> are prescribed by legislation >> enable and support judges to determine cases, and >> meet duty of care requirements.

Vision

The Court’s vision provides for: >> putting children and families first in the design and delivery of services >> ensuring independence and impartiality in the judicial process >> having staff who are valued for providing quality service for families >> providing quality child dispute services for families, and >> being at the forefront of the development of services.

12 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

Jurisdiction

The Family Court of Australia is a superior court of record and deals with more complex matters. These may include, for example: >> Parenting cases including those that involve a child welfare agency and/or allegations of sexual abuse or serious physical abuse of a child (Magellan cases); family violence and/ or mental health issues with other complexities; multiple parties; complex cases where orders sought would have the effect of preventing a parent from communicating with or spending time with a child; multiple expert witnesses; complex questions of law and/or special jurisdictional issues; international child abduction under the Hague Convention; special medical procedures; and/or international relocation.

>> Financial cases that involve multiple parties, valuation of complex interests in trust or corporate OF THE COURT OVERVIEW structures, including minority interests, multiple expert witnesses, complex questions of law and/or jurisdictional issues (including accrued jurisdiction) or complex issues concerning superannuation (such as complex valuations of defined benefit superannuation schemes).

The Court also has original jurisdiction under certain Commonwealth Acts, including the: >> Marriage Act 1961 >> Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 >> Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, and >> Bankruptcy Act 1966.

PORTFOLIO BUDGET STATEMENTS OUTCOME AND PROGRAM

The Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia were merged into a single non-Corporate Commonwealth Entity under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) from 1 July 2013, known as the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. The outcome and program framework of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court sets out the entity's commitments to the Government. Each year, details of the framework are outlined in the Portfolio Budget Statements, along with relevant performance information. Government outcomes are the intended results, impacts or consequences of actions by the Government on the Australian community. Entities deliver programs that are government actions taken to deliver the stated outcomes. Entities are required to identify the programs that contribute to government outcomes over the Budget and forward years.

Outcome

The outcome of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court is described below. Provide access to justice for litigants in family and federal law matters within the jurisdiction of the courts through the provision of judicial and support services.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 13 2

Program

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has a single program under which all services are provided: Family Court and Federal Circuit Court The program objectives for the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court are managed via three separate components: 1. Family Court of Australia >> The objective of the Family Court of Australia is to support Australian families involved in complex family disputes by deciding matters according to the law, promptly, courteously

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT and effectively. This involves: −− providing decisions in complex family disputes for separating Australian couples and families through the determination of matters, and −− providing national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.

2. Federal Circuit Court of Australia >> The objective of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia is to provide a simple and accessible alternative to litigation in the Family Court and Federal Court. >> Where practical, parties are encouraged to resolve their disputes through dispute resolution and negotiation methods.

3. Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration >> The objective of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration is to assist the courts to achieve their stated purpose by: −− maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations −− providing effective and efficient registry services −− effectively and efficiently managing resources, and −− providing effective information and communication technologies.

14 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

COURT SERVICE LOCATIONS

Table 2.1 Family Court of Australia service locations DARWIN

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Canberra (J, R, FC, CS)

NEW SOUTH WALES Cairns Albury R&R (CS, RC); Armidale (RC, FamC);

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW Coffs Harbour (JC, RC); Dubbo R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC); Townsville Lismore R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC); Newcastle (J, R, FC, CS); Parramatta (J, R, FC, CS); Port Macquarie (FamC);

Sydney (J, R, FC, CS); Tamworth (RC, FamC); Mackay Wollongong R&R (R, CS, FC)

NORTHERN TERRITORY Rockhampton Alice Springs R&R (JC, FamC); Darwin (CS, JC, RC, FC) Alice Springs

QUEENSLAND

Brisbane (J, R, FC, CS); Cairns R&R (R, FC, CS, JC); Mackay (JC, RC, FamC); Rockhampton R&R (CS, JC, RC, FamC); BRISBANE Townsville (J, R, FC, CS)

SOUTH AUSTRALIA Lismore

Adelaide (J, R, FC, CS) Armidale Coffs Harbour Tamworth TASMANIA Port Macquarie Dubbo Devonport (RC); Hobart (J, R, FC, CS); Newcastle Launceston R&R (CS, FC, JC, RC) ADELAIDE SYDNEY Parramatta

VICTORIA Wollongong

Dandenong (R, FC, CS); Melbourne (J, R, FC, CS) CANBERRA Albury

LEGEND Dandenong J – Judge JC – Judicial Circuit R – Registrar RC – Registrar Circuit MELBOURNE FC – Family Consultant FamC – Family Consultant Circuit CS – Client Services R&R – rural and regional registry Devonport

Launceston Registry or rural and regional registry

Circuit location HOBART

16 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

COURT SERVICE LOCATIONS

Table 2.1 Family Court of Australia service locations DARWIN

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

Canberra (J, R, FC, CS)

NEW SOUTH WALES Cairns Albury R&R (CS, RC); Armidale (RC, FamC);

Coffs Harbour (JC, RC); Dubbo R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC); OF THE COURT OVERVIEW Townsville Lismore R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC); Newcastle (J, R, FC, CS); Parramatta (J, R, FC, CS); Port Macquarie (FamC);

Sydney (J, R, FC, CS); Tamworth (RC, FamC); Mackay Wollongong R&R (R, CS, FC)

NORTHERN TERRITORY Rockhampton Alice Springs R&R (JC, FamC); Darwin (CS, JC, RC, FC) Alice Springs

QUEENSLAND

Brisbane (J, R, FC, CS); Cairns R&R (R, FC, CS, JC); Mackay (JC, RC, FamC); Rockhampton R&R (CS, JC, RC, FamC); BRISBANE Townsville (J, R, FC, CS)

SOUTH AUSTRALIA Lismore

Adelaide (J, R, FC, CS) Armidale Coffs Harbour Tamworth TASMANIA Port Macquarie Dubbo Devonport (RC); Hobart (J, R, FC, CS); Newcastle Launceston R&R (CS, FC, JC, RC) ADELAIDE SYDNEY Parramatta

VICTORIA Wollongong

Dandenong (R, FC, CS); Melbourne (J, R, FC, CS) CANBERRA Albury

Launceston Registry or rural and regional registry

Circuit location HOBART

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 17 2

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INITIATIVES

The Court is continuously seeking to enhance access to justice and to provide meaningful information necessary to advance litigation via its information technology systems. This includes being attentive to the needs of those who live in regional Australia, those who have limited means, those who do not have legal representation, and those who may be disadvantaged as a result of violence or language or some other barrier to justice. Initiatives to advance this effort include:

Ongoing improvement to the Commonwealth Courts Portal OVERVIEW OF THE COURT

The Commonwealth Courts Portal (www.comcourts.gov.au), launched in July 2007, is a continuing initiative of the Family Court, the Federal Court and the Federal Circuit Court. The Portal provides free web-based access to information about cases that are before these courts. After registering, lawyers and parties can keep track of their cases, identify documents that have been filed and view outcomes, orders made and future court dates. Users log on using a single user ID and access multiple jurisdictions from a single central web-based system. A popular function of the Portal is the ability for users to elect to be notified of any recent activity on their files. In 2015–16 more than 313,000 such notifications were sent. The eFiling functions continue to be expanded and a number of enhancements were made to the Portal during the year, including: >> enabling document viewer functionality for Federal Court files: right clicking on an eLodged PDF in the documents filed menu now displays a list of unrepresented litigants and law firms that have viewed the document >> available court dates now display the first appropriate return date up to 365 days away, plus the available dates over the next 80 days. Previously the search finished after 110 days, and >> a new function to allow members of the public to pay setting down, hearing and financial conference fees online.

The following statistics highlight the significant growth in the number of Portal users as at 30 June 2016: >> 6843 firms now registered (up from 5943 at 30 June 2015) >> lawyer registrations have increased to 14,031 (up from 12,007 at 30 June 2015), and >> total registered users now at 247,887 (up from 196,865 at 30 June 2015).

18 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

Table 2.2 Registered users of the Commonwealth Courts Portal, 2012–13 to 2015–16

30 June 2013 30 June 2014 30 June 2015 30 June 2016 Number of law firms registered 4134 4965 5943 6843

Number of lawyers registered 8370 9921 12,007 14,031

Other users 109,738 143,171 184,858 233,856

Total registered users 118,108 153,092 196,865 247,887 OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW Table 2.3 Documents eFiled in the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, 2012–13 to 2015–16

2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 Adelaide 7121 8927 10,797 14,405

Albury 802 1114 1695 1938

Alice Springs 136 70 84 144

Brisbane 35,666 41,609 48,362 55,915

Cairns 1350 1918 2619 2827

Canberra 2914 3420 4160 5382

Coffs Harbour 1000 1452 1757 1899

Dandenong 7594 9251 10,339 13,948

Darwin 519 822 1071 1236

Dubbo 660 874 1257 1993

Hobart 700 1001 1255 1435

Launceston 876 902 976 1478

Lismore 1672 2274 2658 3310

Melbourne 31,650 37,747 45,774 55,774

Newcastle 6700 8734 11,469 14,757

Parramatta 11,101 13,441 17,729 24,097

Rockhampton 1311 1664 1909 2192

Sydney 15,372 18,998 23,925 30,924

Townsville 2787 2904 3758 4642

Wollongong 2352 3341 4004 5826

Total 132,283 160,463 195,598 244,122

In Western Australia there were 8810 documents eFiled during 2015–16 (up from 7460 in 2014–15).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 19 2

Casetrack enhancement

Casetrack is the courts’ case management system introduced in 2002. A major enhancement is currently underway to improve its useability. The changes will introduce new and updated functionality, including modern browser-based technology and simplified processes for case management. The first new module was implemented in March 2014. Development of additional functionality continued during 2015–16 with functions for management of fees. New functionality was also written to allow the courts to manage divorce hearings electronically. Those functions have been trialled in some registries during 2015–16.

Divorce moves online OVERVIEW OF THE COURT

Significant work has been undertaken in both courts to develop a fully electronic divorce file. The final stage of the work – to enable the capacity to scan, browse and upload documents into Casetrack – was completed in January 2016. Since the Family Court’s Practice Direction No. 6 of 2003, almost all divorce applications are now filed in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Moving to a completely electronic divorce file is a significant shift away from paper filing, to eFiling using the interactive online form in the Commonwealth Courts Portal.

20 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2 eFiling has many benefits: >> there is no need to visit or queue at registries >> filing fee payments are processed securely online >> 24/7 access to court files >> less chance for errors in applications (step-by-step guide) >> option to select the most suitable court date, and >> the option to receive email notifications and alerts about the status of matters.

As part of this strategy the How do I… apply for divorce? web page has been redeveloped as

a dynamic interactive page to assist clients with applying for divorce, and a new How do I… OF THE COURT OVERVIEW register for the Commonwealth Courts Portal and eFile an application for divorce? has also been launched. The Application for Divorce Kit is no longer available on the website. Clients who for some reason (including no internet, no credit card, fee reduction for financial hardship, no printer/ scanner) cannot eFile their divorce application, can contact the National Enquiry Centre to request an electronic or hard copy of the kit.

Online proof of divorce

An online proof of divorce request process was introduced in March 2015 to streamline the process for people wanting to obtain a copy of their divorce order from the courts. The process involves a person completing an online interactive form and submitting payment online by credit card. The Court then provides an original copy of the divorce. The process has been very successful and to date 12,149 requests have been made since the online interactive form was introduced.

The new process has also streamlined the process for the courts in reducing the amount of back office paperwork and time to process the requests.

Registry wait numbers in real time

Lawyers and litigants can check wait times in the registry, in real time, from the courts’ websites, allowing informed decisions about the best time to visit registries, when wait times are less. It also assists registry staff in providing a better client service. This is a small, low cost initiative aimed at improving customer service, providing better visibility for litigants and lawyers regarding wait times, and using our existing resources efficiently and effectively by spreading demand across business hours. Counter waiting times are available for the Adelaide, Brisbane, Dandenong, Melbourne, Parramatta and Sydney registries.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 21 2

Live Chat

Live Chat was launched on the courts’ websites in April 2014. Live Chat is a cost effective and easily manageable channel of communication. Staff can multi-task and manage up to four conversations at once and it also provides a convenient way for clients to access the courts and engage with client service officers. OVERVIEW OF THE COURT Live Chat statistics >> 110,772 live chats since its launch >> average 261 live chats per day >> 31 per cent of questions are about Portal support >> 69 per cent are general questions, and >> applying for a divorce and parenting applications are the most popular Live Chat topics.

Twitter

The Family Court of Australia’s Twitter account has been operating since October 2012. Twitter provides followers with timely, relevant and easy to access information about the Family Court of Australia and family law issues. Followers are predominately made up of legal professionals, law students, journalists and members of the general public. During 2015–16 the Court: >> gained 1177 new followers, bringing the total number of followers to 2871 >> sent 320 tweets, made up of 57 plain text, 187 page links and 76 photo links – an average of over six tweets per week. >> was re-tweeted 532 times, and >> had a potential reach of just over 1.7 million.

Follow the Court on Twitter https://twitter.com/FamilyCourtAU

22 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

You Tube

The Family Court’s YouTube channel has been operating since October 2013. There are a range of videos available to help litigants prepare for and understand court processes. Three new videos were produced in 2015–16: >> Why am I seeing a family consultant? 5–8 years OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW >> Why am I seeing a family consultant? 9–12 years, and >> eFiling your family law matter in the Commonwealth Courts Portal.

There are now 11 videos on the channel; combined there has been 33,414 minutes watched and 8635 views. The top three videos are: How to apply for divorce: serving divorce papers; Mediation – what to expect; and the Court Tour. Visit the Family Court’s YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/familycourtAU

Infrastructure improvements

During 2015–16 a number of changes and upgrades were made to the IT infrastructure to meet the courts’ needs and improve performance and stability. Infrastructure improvements in the financial year included: >> direct network drive mapping between registries, offering court staff seamless access to shared drives and files when travelling >> implementation of a new remote access solution >> courtroom technology replacement for Townsville registry >> courtroom technology replacement for Canberra courtroom three >> planning for the courts’ merger with the Federal Court elevated; work commenced joining the Wide Area Network (WAN) and the Finance 1 system, and >> IT infrastructure was installed in new premises in Sydney (Level 13, 80 William Street).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 23 2

REGISTRY SERVICES INITIATIVES

Registry services delivery strategy – towards 2020

The Registry Services Delivery Strategy was developed in 2014 and a number of the key areas identified in the strategy have been progressed including the development of the electronic divorce. As part of the review cycle, the strategy was updated in February 2016 to reflect the progress since its development and rather than confine the strategy to a set time-frame, it was deemed appropriate to extend the strategy towards 2020.

Client Service Senior Manager’s Group OVERVIEW OF THE COURT

The Client Service Senior Managers’ Group (CSSMG) comprises registry managers and registry and judicial service team leaders from the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. The CSSMG aims to be innovative in the development of new ideas and seeks to identify and implement ways to continually improve service delivery across the courts by streamlining procedures, ensuring consistency in work practice, providing better information and enhancing client contact with the courts. During the reporting period, the group met by video-link, and communicated via the courts’ Connections technology using a ‘CSSMG community’. Using this technology, the CSSMG can discuss issues, provide reports, post blogs and upload files for discussion. CSSMG was involved in several priority projects during 2015–16 including: >> following the successful implementation of a ‘no-cash’ registry environment (effective 1 July 2015), the strategy to cease accepting cheque payments continued, with finalisation expected during 2016–17 >> assisting with the eDivorce pilot at Brisbane registry >> promoting the use of the Portal for eFiling documents and refinement of eFiling procedures in response to the growth in eFiling >> contributing to the development of an eLearning induction package for new chambers staff >> assisting the courts’ ongoing debt collection strategy (to reduce unpaid fees) by introducing an Event Based Fees process, which has automated the administration of fee payment for defended hearings and conciliation conferences >> assisting with the implementation of the Family Law Amendment (Arbitration and Other Measures) Rules 2015. The new rules permit applications for arbitration, applications for orders in arbitration, issue of subpoena and applications to register an award – for court ordered arbitration, as well as voluntary arbitration >> assisting with the implementation of the Family Court’s rule changes in relation to subpoena management, to harmonise the approach of the production of subpoenas with that of the Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001, thus contributing to further streamline family law procedures, and >> continuing to refine safety planning processes in registries, and will be providing advice to the courts Family Violence Committee in due course.

24 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

Community relationships and consultation

Registry managers of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court assist the Court with community relationship building. Much of this work is done at the local level. Engagement with local communities, community-based organisations concerned with family support and the family law system, community forums, law societies, family law pathway networks, volunteer networks and other government agencies, including many at the state level, are something that the Court has been reporting in some detail in recent years in an appendix to the annual report. The reporting shows that different registries take different approaches, reflecting local needs and opportunities and capacity for action. Activities are highlighted in Appendix nine. OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 25 2

INTERNAL COMMUNICATION INITIATIVES

Intranet upgrade OVERVIEW OF THE COURT

The courts’ new intranets were launched on 23 June 2016. The intranets, which have been re-branded as ‘The Source’ to better reflect the role of providing a source of information, have a clean, professional new look and feel and include the following features: >> user-friendly navigation including a mega-menu and streamlined access to information >> ‘Enterprise Search’ which allows staff to search the intranets, websites and Connections in a single place >> integration of some Connections functionality, including wiki and blog feeds and the ability to search profiles from the homepage >> an ‘Activity Stream’ on the homepage, which alerts staff about new and updated policies, procedures and forms >> broad coverage of news from across the courts, including images for the main news item >> the ability to toggle between the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court intranets, and >> a ‘How do I’ section.

26 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

IBM Connections

Connections has continued to provide a forum for planning activities and projects as well as supporting communication and collaboration across the courts. The National Enquiry Centre utilise Connections as a knowledge base, training resource and communication tool and consider it a critical resource in responding to and assisting clients with their enquiries. Key achievements in 2015–16 include: >> an upgrade to version 5 which provides users with a more modern, clean and intuitive interface as well as new features which further support communication, collaboration and innovation across the courts OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW >> growth in the number of communities to 157 as at 30 June 2016 >> increased participation and use of wikis as staff discover how useful they are for providing a centralised platform to share information. There has been an increase in staff interacting around the information through comments and recommendations, and >> continuing work on the registry services wiki which will support staff by providing improved access to procedures and processes. A card sort exercise was undertaken to assist in developing an improved structure for the information in the wiki.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 27 2

INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR COURT EXCELLENCE

The Chief Justice has committed the Family Court of Australia to holistically implementing

the International Framework of Court Excellence (the framework). Having completed a comprehensive internal survey of all judges and staff in 2013 to obtain a robust ‘self-assessment’ of the Court’s functioning against the principles promoted in this framework in the first year, the Court has put the central recommendations arising from that assessment into to action in order to improve the Court’s performance. Some of these are detailed below.

Governance and communication

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT On the recommendations of the Court Excellence Committee, chaired by the Honourable Justice Murphy, the Chief Justice reformed the governance model of the Court. An early step was the establishment of a Court Policy Committee to oversee five new standing committees (see page 104 for more information on this committee governance structure). This arrangement has been especially relevant this past year because the Court has been required to define the resources required to support the Appeal Division and first instance judges in the context of the reforms arising from the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act 2016 (Cth).

Court user satisfaction

A critical area of the framework is taking account of court users’ views of their experience of registry services. The courts have undertaken comprehensive court user satisfaction surveys and while over 75 per cent of those surveyed reported overall satisfaction with their experience at the registries, there are always areas to improve. For example, the Family Court has redesigned the website to make it more responsive to users’ requirements for convenience, plain English and more effective transactional processes with the Court.

International collaboration

The Court is committed to contributing to judicial administration and development at the international level, and also values the benefit of learning from other jurisdictions. With respect international Framework For to the Court Excellence Framework, the Honourable Justice Court exCellenCe Six YearS On... Murphy addressed the Singapore State Courts Conference in February 2016 titled Judiciary of the Future. His Honour co-presented with Judge Doherty of the District Court of New Zealand, sharing their respective experiences of the integrated implementation of the Court Excellence Framework. As well, the Court’s publications on this implementation

The hon JusTice Murphy work are now available through the International Consortium Singapore 2016 Resources website at: http://www.courtexcellence.com/ International Framework Resources/Other-Resources.aspx for Court Excellence – Six Years on…

28 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

CHILD DISPUTE SERVICES

Child Dispute Services’ family consultants provide high quality, expert and independent forensic social science advice to judges of the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia in the best interests of children. The values and principles underpinning this advice are: >> child focus >> impartiality >> transparency

>> accountability OF THE COURT OVERVIEW >> a basis in evidence and in empirical research, and >> professionally established in the disciplines of psychology and social work and the respective codes of conduct, regulatory frameworks and ethical requirements.

This is achieved by the delivery of: >> assessment of parents and children >> submission of a forensic report to the Court >> written preliminary advice to the Court >> oral advice to the Court, and >> expert evidence in court.

Australian standards

Following the release of the Australian Standards of Practice for Family Assessments and Reporting by the Chief Justice and the Chief Judge in 2015, this publication was widely distributed and promoted to all of those concerned with the family law system. This document provides information to decision makers, agencies and legal professionals involved in cases, as to what constitutes good practice in family assessments and reporting. It outlines a minimum standard of practice when conducting family assessments and preparing reports. A copy can be found at: http://www.familycourt.gov.au/wps/wcm/ connect/fcoaweb/about/policies-and-procedures/asp-family- assessments-reporting The Australian Standards of Practice for Family Noting the risks associated with family violence, this is an Assessments and Reporting important addition to the practice of report writers (internal and external) and more widely, it promotes an understanding about what a family report is and the role of the expert.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 29 2

Family violence screening

Family violence screening and risk assessment is an integral part of Child Dispute Services and ensures that family consultants provide informed advice to the courts in the best interests of children. A central tenet of, for example, s11F interventions undertaken by Child Dispute Services, is to screen for risks that may exist in a given matter and provide a detailed interim description to the courts via memoranda, oral advice, or a child and parent issues assessment. In line with this, the current professional directions for family consultants outline a series of key areas which they must examine during s11F assessments in order to formulate an (empirically based) opinion regarding family violence risk. To enhance this practice, a decision was taken to source a structured family violence screening tool for family consultants to use during an interim s11F intervention. The preference was for OVERVIEW OF THE COURT a brief instrument, reliant on extant empirical findings, that possessed robust psychometric properties and was suitable for use with parties that are separated. The Mediator’s Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns Practitioner Version 2 (MASIC-2P; Beck, Holtzwoth-Munroe & Applegate, 2012) was deemed to be the best fit for the Australian family law context. MASIC was adapted for use by family consultants and tested in Brisbane and Melbourne. The courts were particularly interested to refine questions which include behaviourally-based questions; questions on coercive and controlling behaviour; and questions which would solicit reports of any violence before separation and since separation (noting that homicide and in particular, uxoricide, is found to more likely occur in the first year or even months, after separation. The trials commenced in April 2015 in Melbourne and Brisbane. To enable family consultants to prepare prior to the consultation with parents, the questionnaire was completed online by parties before they attended the registries for their s11F appointment. Parties were sent an email containing instructions and a URL. The pilots confirmed that this screening approach is highly informative for the family consultant and assists them in refining early assessment to better take account of ‘red flag’ risk factors. Markers of family violence can enable a system of responses and potentially prevent tragedy. The evaluation report can be made available on request.

Professional development (family violence)

It is critical that family consultants’ practice is based on research and an understanding of the dynamics associated with family violence. Ongoing development and learning is supported by a Connections core knowledge site which can be accessed by all consultants and contains up-to-date research. Desktop eLearning is also available and a series of new modules were developed, the first being on family violence. The new induction framework is rigorous and ensures that incoming family consultants are given the best opportunity to be successful in the unique role of family assessment and forensic court reporting. Significantly, a continuous professional development framework was introduced requiring family consultants to accrue points for undertaking development in critical practice areas. This initiative brings our service into alignment with the requirements of professional bodies such as the Australian Psychological Society. For more information on family consultant professional development activities in 2015–16, see page 134. A highlight for 2015–16 was a conference for all court-employed family consultants in Melbourne. Dr Robert Simon attended as resident at this conference. Dr Simon is a well-respected forensic psychologist, experienced custody evaluator of 30 years and renowned author in the field of family law assessments.

30 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

The conference included training in how to deal effectively and responsibly with cross-examination; techniques in observing parent and child interaction; family violence assessment and screening; refreshed professional directions for assessment and reporting; the risk of bias; mental health disorders and parenting capacity; and working effectively with children in complex settings, including Indigenous children. Child Dispute Services selectively attended conferences including the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (Seattle) to ensure that the service remains up to date and leading in this specialist field.

New material for children

Child Disputes Services has supported the courts’ Children’s Committee initiative to revamp OVERVIEW OF THE COURT OVERVIEW the material for children on the courts’ websites. These pages are coined ‘Kids and young people’ and specific landing pages are now available for children 5–8 years, 9–12 years and teenagers. A key project for 2015–16 was the development of two new videos for children who are scheduled to meet with a family consultant at the Court. More information about these videos can be found at page 80.

ACCESS AND INCLUSION

The Court continues to develop and implement plans under its access and inclusion framework. The framework aims to ensure all clients, particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged clients, receive the assistance they need to access the Court. The framework acknowledges that justice begins well before a litigant has their first court event, and that a client’s capacity to participate in court processes is significantly influenced by the quality of information and the level of administrative support they receive. Linking to the International Framework for Court Excellence, the framework also takes a broader view across the shared infrastructure needed to support the delivery of accessible services (e.g. information technology, training and performance development) as well as identifying the links, approaches, synergies and principles that affect justice as a whole. The current plans under the framework are: >> Multicultural Plan >> Family Violence Plan >> Indigenous Action Plan >> Disability Action Plan (to be developed in 2016–17), and >> Mental Health Support Plan (to be developed).

The Court recognises that people do not neatly fit into a single target client group, hence the Court has tried to adopt a flexible model of service delivery that allows staff to tailor services to the individual’s need.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 31 2

Cultural competency eLearning

The courts' cultural competency eLearning package, which forms part of the courts’ Multicultural Plan, was launched in October 2015. The package consists of six modules which can be completed over a period of time, allowing staff to build on knowledge and awareness. The eLearning package aims to: >> improve knowledge and understanding of the wide range of culturally diverse communities who access the courts >> use critical reflection to understand the impact of stereotypes, and

OVERVIEW OF THE COURT >> provide staff with practical skills to adapt and deliver services to best meet the needs of culturally and linguistically diverse clients.

The eLearning package contributes to the courts’ overall access and equity outcomes by providing staff with information to assist in reducing the barriers experienced by culturally and linguistically diverse clients when accessing court services.

Multicultural Plan

Mental Health Family Violence Support Plan Plan

ACCESS AND INCLUSION FRAMEWORK

Disability Action Indigenous Action Plan Plan

32 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 2

INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION

Indonesia

The Family Court continues to work with the Supreme Court of Indonesia and the Religious Courts of Indonesia to address access to justice issues for disadvantaged groups, with particular regard to family and domestic violence. The Chief Justice and Leisha Lister appeared before the Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT) to report on the human rights issues confronting women and girls in the Indian Ocean-Asia Pacific region.

Chair of the JSCFADT’s Human Rights sub-committee, The Honourable Philip Ruddock MP, OF THE COURT OVERVIEW stated that the inquiry was a timely review of the obstacles impeding women and girls from realising their full potential as human beings—as social, economic and political participants— in a very diverse region. Recommendation three of the report states: The Committee recommends that the Australian Government encourage the Australian courts to expand their investment in the work of making the registration of marriages and births more accessible in Indonesia; and expand its efforts to pursue similar work where it can facilitate reform in other countries in the Indo-Pacific region.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 33 2

Legal identity documents in Indonesia

In Indonesia, legal identity documents, including birth, marriage and divorce certificates, are required to enrol in school, receive benefits from government social protection programmes, register to vote, establish head of household status, claim the right to assets and inheritance, and to be eligible for certain jobs. Registration of birth, marriage, divorce and death are also important for the state to produce accurate vital statistics that are used to plan and allocate budgets for various government social and economic programmes. But despite their importance, millions of eligible Indonesians – particularly those in low income and rural households – do not have them. In the poorest 30 per cent of Indonesian households, 55 per cent of couples do not have a marriage certificate and 75 per cent of their children do not have a birth certificate. OVERVIEW OF THE COURT The Family Court of Australia, the Supreme Court of Indonesia and the Religious Courts of Indonesia have worked together to strengthen the delivery of affordable and accessible court services for a number of years. The cooperation has focussed on enhancing and broadening access to the courts in family matters (such as marriage and divorce certificates) for women, the poor, those living in remote areas and other marginalised groups. Including: >> continued support to improve client services and the quality of information provided by court staff, and >> strengthened delivery of services to the justice seekers through court fee waivers, circuit court hearings and legal aid posts in courts.

The Overseas Development Institute, a respected independent voice in international development, was commissioned by the Australia Indonesia Partnership for Justice (AIPJ) to conduct an evaluation of the role of civil society in justice reform in Indonesia including AIPJ’s contribution and two of the three case studies highlight the role the Family Court of Australia has played in contributing to the enhancement of civil society organisations’ contributions to justice reform in Indonesia. The full report can be found at: https://www.odi.org/publications/10490-civil-society-and-justice-reform-indonesia In particular the case study on legal identity, https://www.odi.org/publications/10498- realising-right-legal-identity-indonesia, examines efforts of civil society organisations and the AIPJ to expand access for Indonesian citizens to legal identity documents, particularly during the AIPJ project period (2011–2015). It covers efforts to change policy and to implement policies, including, most recently, mobile and integrated services which began in 2014.

34 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

IN FOCUS IN FOCUS

Harmony Day 2016

Harmony Day is held on 21 March each year and coincides with the United Nations International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. It is a day of cultural respect, widely celebrated across schools, childcare centres, community groups, churches, businesses and federal, state and local government agencies. The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court strive for high quality, accessible and client-based services for culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) clients that support the resolution of their legal disputes. The courts participate in Harmony Day each year to recognise and celebrate the rich cultural diversity that exists in our workplaces. Court employees were asked to nominate colleagues within their registries who exceed in providing service to CALD clients, and/or who actively seek to raise awareness of the importance of working in a diverse and multicultural workplace.

Image: Gloria Katrib receives her award from Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO The winners of the 2016 Harmony Day award were:

Gloria Katrib – Parramatta Gloria was nominated by two of her colleagues who are proud to have her as a client service officer at the National Enquiry Centre. Gloria has worked for the courts for 10 years and strives to ensure access to justice and clear communication for CALD clients. She is fluent in Arabic and uses her multi-lingual skills to assist clients. Her understanding of the cultural traditions and language assists other staff in understanding how to best assist CALD clients within the professional constraints of the role.

Lyn Imlach – Dandenong Lyn ensures the delivery of accessible high quality services for CALD clients and actively promotes the importance of working in a diverse workplace. These ideals are regularly reinforced during discussions at team meetings and during the working day. As a team leader, Lyn encourages her staff to be aware of the importance of dealing with clients as individuals, and to tailor the provision of information for each individual client and their needs.

Image: Lyn Imlach

REPORT ON OVERVIEWCOURT OFPERFORMANCE THE COURT

23 3

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE STATEMENT

Judicial services

u Introductory statement

I, Warwick Soden, as the accountable authority of the Family Court of Australia, present the 2015–16 annual performance statements of the Family Court of Australia, as required under REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). In my opinion, these annual performance statements are based on properly maintained records, accurately reflect the performance of the entity, and comply with subsection 39(2) of the PGPA Act.

WG Soden Principal Registrar and Chief Executive Officer Federal Court of Australia

u Family Court of Australia purpose

The Family Court’s objective is to support Australian families involved in complex family disputes by deciding matters according to the law, promptly, courteously and effectively. This involves: >> the provision of decisions in complex family disputes for separating Australian couples and families through the determination of matters, and >> providing national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.

u Results

40 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has one outcome and one program on which it reports in 2015–16. See Figure 3.1.

Figure 3.1 The outcome and program of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court

Outcome 1 Provide access to justice for litigants in family and federal law matters within the jurisdiction of the courts through the provision of judicial and support services.

Program 1.1 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court

Whilst the Court’s reporting is for the single program, reporting information is provided in two streams: >> judicial services (maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations), and REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT >> registry services (provision of effective and efficient registry services).

The Court uses this approach to provide clearer reporting of its performance against its KPIs. The first part of this chapter discusses the performance of judicial services in 2015–16. The registry services performance statement and associated information can be found on page 59. Judicial services include: >> determining cases that are complex in law and/or facts and/or have multiple parties >> covering specialised areas in family law, and >> providing national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.

In order to better understand the Court’s performance, it is necessary to understand that the Court’s caseload is predominantly applications for final orders, applications in a case and consent orders applications. These three types of cases have the biggest affect on the Court’s overall workload and performance. Final orders applications are mostly cases where clients commence litigated proceedings to obtain parenting and financial orders. The applicants set out their claims to spend time with their children and/or split their financial assets (including property and other assets). Applications in a case are additional proceedings in which a client seeks interim or interlocutory orders before a final hearing. Consent orders applications are where the clients have agreed or settled on terms relating to the parenting and/or financial issues and they are seeking the Court ratify these by way of making them binding court orders.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 41 3

Table 3.1 Key performance indictors – judicial services, 2015–16

Judicial Services KPIs Target Clearance rate (final orders) 100%

Cases pending conclusion that are less than 12 months old 75%

Reserved judgments are waiting less than three months after 75% the conclusion of the trial

Number of complaints as a percentage of applications received 1%

Criterion source >> Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Corporate Plan 2015–2019.

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE >> Component 1.1.1 key performance indicators, Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Portfolio Budget Statements 2015–16.

Result against performance criterion

Summary of performance In 2015–16, the Court achieved one judicial KPI and was unable to achieve three. Table 3.2 summarises the Court’s results in delivering judicial services against the KPIs from 2011–12 to 2015–16.

Table 3.2 Summary of performance against judicial services KPIs, 2011–12 to 2015–16

Judicial services KPIs 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 result result result result result Clearance rate more than 100% 100% 101% 98% 99% 99%

75% of matters pending 72% 71% 72% 72% 70% conclusion are less than 12 months old

75% of reserved judgments are 50% 51% 50% 56% 48% waiting less than three months after the conclusion of trial (at 30 June)

Complaints*—1% of total 0.6% 0.9% 0.7% 0.8% 0.7% applications received

Number of KPI achieved 2 2 1 1 1

* This figure includes complaints about the administration of the Court and judicial services complaints, for which detailed information is reported elsewhere in this Part.

42 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3 u Analysis of performance against purpose

Summary workload for 2015–16 The Court deals with the most complex and difficult family law cases containing either parenting or financial issues or a combination of both. Figure 3.2 and Figure 3.3 show the summary caseload during 2015–16.

Figure 3.2 Summary workload by application type, 2015–16

Application/Case Type Filed % Filed Finalised Pending Final orders applications 3017 15% 2979 3105

Application in a case (Interim) 3616 18% 3521 1497

Consent orders applications 13,458 66% 13,357 1052

Other applications 327 1% 342 190 PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

Total 20,418 100% 20,199 5844

Other applications, 1%

Final orders applications, 15%

Application in a case (interim), 18%

Consent orders applications, 66%

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 43 3

Figure 3.3 Issues sought on Final Order cases filed, 2015–16

Issues sought on Applications for Final Orders Parenting only 32%

Financial only 52%

Parenting and financial 14%

Other 2%

Parenting and financial, 14%

Other, 2% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE

Parenting only, 32%

Financial only, 52%

44 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Case attrition The Court’s cases are made up of complex matters that often involve multiple parenting or financial issues having higher levels of conflict between the parties. The parties in these cases are less likely to arrive at an agreement on their dispute and, as a result, will have a high chance of requiring a judicial decision after conducting a trial. Of all the cases finalised during 2015–16, fewer than 37 per cent were placed into a judge’s docket which meant that efforts to help clients reach a settlement were unsuccessful and so they needed to be managed by a judge towards proceeding to trial. Figure 3.4 shows the changing settlement and attrition trend of the Court’s completed cases and the case management phase where they finalised.

Figure 3.4 Attrition and settlement trend in the Court’s caseload, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 10 0% 10 0% 10 0% 10 0% 10 0% 82% 82% 82% 82% 78 % 56% 51% 51% 50% 46% 47 % 42% 42% 40% 37 % 30% 32% 33% 31% 27 % 13% 15% 16% 15% 14% 0% Lodged First Court Pre-trial Docket Commence Judgment Hearing/ conferencing entry trial Conference

2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 45 3

First instance trials Parties who are unable to settle their dispute require a judge to make a decision after a trial, although frequently parties reach an agreement during the trial process. Figure 3.5 provides the number of cases that are finalised at first instance trial.

Figure 3.5 Cases finalised at first instance trial, 2011–12 to 2015–16

1000

779 800 739 701 685

600 280 248 532 463 266

213

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE 400

200

316 459 453 419 319 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Number of cases finalised by judgment at trial Number of cases settled at trial

Number of finalisations During 2015–16, the Court had the following finalisation deliverables it expected to obtain: >> 2832 final order cases >> 3413 interim orders applications >> 14,518 consent orders applications, and >> 421 other orders’ applications.

The targets were based on the Court’s historical achievements; its resource level including judges; the estimated new applications initiated each year; and the number of active cases (pending). Each application type requires a different amount of court resource effort to resolve. For example, final orders applications and associated interim applications require more judicial effort to resolve, whereas consent order applications are mainly administration of cases where parties agree to terms prior to filing. The Court also deals with discrete applications, such as contraventions, contempt and applications made pursuant to the Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction.

46 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Final orders During 2015–16, 2979 applications for final orders were finalised, about five per cent above the target, but approximately the same as 2014–15.

Figure 3.6 Final orders applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16

5000

4000

3000

2000 REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

1000 3296 3261 3149 2850 3041 2958 2955 2839 3074 2936 3028 2982 3017 2979 3105 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Filed Finalised Pending

Applications in a case (interim) During 2015–16, 3521 applications in a case were finalised, about three per cent more than the target and six per cent more than in 2014–15. These applications are associated with an existing case and typically can be dealt with in a shorter time.

Figure 3.7 Applications in a case, 2011–12 to 2015–16

5000

4000

3000

2000

1000 3620 3620 1240 3387 3491 1136 3419 3270 1285 3476 3333 1428 3616 3521 1497 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Filed Finalised Pending

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 47 3

Consent orders During 2015–16, 13,357 consent orders applications were finalised, which although eight per cent less than the target, is about the same as were finalised in 2014–15. These applications vary in complexity and are presented to the Court as an agreement between the parties to be considered and ratified by a registrar. Figure 3.6 to Figure 3.9 display five year trends in filings, finalisations and pending (active) applications.

Figure 3.8 Consent orders applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16

15,000

12,000

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE 9000

6000

3000 681 787 807 1012 1052 10,516 10,456 11,329 11,223 12,988 12,968 13,662 13,457 13,458 13,357 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Filed Finalised Pending

Figure 3.9 All applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5000 17,762 17,695 5215 17,881 18,071 5025 19,686 19,356 5355 20,397 20,108 5644 20,418 20,199 5844 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Filed Finalised Pending

48 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Clearance rate The Court aims to finalise at least the same number of cases that start in a year, and as such, is attempting to achieve a clearance rate of at least 100 per cent. A clearance rate of 100 per cent or higher indicates that the Court is able to keep up with its new work and prevent an increase in its backlog of pending cases. In 2015–16, the Court achieved a clearance rate of 99 per cent. Figure 3.10 shows the five year trend in clearance rates.

Figure 3.10 All applications, clearance rates, 2011–12 to 2015–16

120%

100%

80% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

60%

40%

20% 100% 101% 98% 99% 99% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Clearance Rate Target (100%)

Backlog indicators The ‘backlog’ is the number of applications that are pending (that is, still active) at the end of the year. These applications are being actively managed for their next court event. In particular, ageing applications that are beyond the timeliness target are a focus for the Court.

Age of pending applications The Court has a backlog of active cases to ensure there is sufficient level of workload to manage, while new cases commence and cases finalise during the year. The Court’s goal is to ensure its pending cases are commensurate in size with its resources and it is continually adjusting as cases are filed and finalise, and in particular, those pending cases are not aged excessively. The Court aims to have more than 75 per cent of its pending applications less than 12 months old. At 30 June 2016, the Court nearly met this target by achieving 70 per cent of pending applications being less than 12 months old, compared with 72 per cent at 30 June 2015.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 49 3

The Court regularly reviews its oldest active cases to better understand the causes of their delay and to determine ways in which the older cases can be dealt with in a timely manner. Figure 3.11 and Figure 3.12 show the five year trend in the age distribution of backlog applications.

Figure 3.11 Age of pending applications, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE 20% 10% 72% 71% 72% 72% 70% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

% pending less than 12 months old Target (more than 75%)

Figure 3.12 All applications, time pending, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 51% 50% 51% 52% 51% 50% 40% 30% 21% 20% 21% 20% 19% 16% 18% 16% 17% 17% 20% 12% 12% 12% 11% 13% 10%

0% 0–6 months 6–12 months 12–24 months 24+ months

2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Age of reserved judgments outstanding The Court aims to have 75 per cent of reserved judgments delivered within three months after the hearing. The Court did not meet this target in 2015–16, with 48 per cent of judgments still not delivered at 30 June 2016 less than three months old.

50 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Figure 3.13 shows the five year trend in reserved judgments outstanding at 30 June each year, compared with the target of 75 per cent. Figure 3.14 shows the five year trend in time for reserved judgments outstanding at 30 June each year.

Figure 3.13 Reserved judgments outstanding (pending) less than three months, as at 30 June 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

30% PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT 20% 10% 50% 51% 50% 56% 48% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Within 3 months Target (75%)

Figure 3.14 Time for reserved judgments outstanding (pending), at 30 June 2011–12 to 2015–16

180 156 157 160 147 148 140 36 117 52 120 50 49

100 24 40 16 30 80 24 35 60

40 20 58 80 73 83 75 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Within 3 months More than 3 but less than 6 months More than 6 months

This measure is a snapshot at particular point in the year and does not fully encapsulate the actual time it takes the Court to deliver a reserved judgment throughout the whole year. The actual time for a judgment to be delivered is better explained in the following section.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 51 3

Percentage of cases finalised The Court aims to finalise cases within a timely manner, but is mindful that family law cases are particularly difficult and emotional, and the Family Court’s decisions affect many lives, potentially for many years. As a result, the Court also recognises the need to allow clients the time to deal with many emotions that a family breakdown and the ensuing legal matters can cause. It is difficult to set and achieve a blanket timeliness target because the number of variables affecting the parties involved in each case has multiple impacts on its progress towards a decision. Although the Court does not have performance indicators in the Portfolio Budget Statement about the time to finalise cases, the Court continues to internally monitor the age of its finalised cases to assist with determining resource allocation and the effort required to dispose cases.

Age of finalised applications

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE The Court’s internal target for timeliness to finalisation is based on previous case history and its case management processes. The ability to get clients before the Court relies heavily on various factors: the Court’s case management principles; delays between court interventions; available resources; and the clients. The Court aims to finalise 75 per cent of cases within 12 months, the other 25 per cent are the most complex cases, many of which cannot be expected to be managed within that timeframe. During 2015–16 the Court finalised about 93 per cent of cases (applications) within 12 months which is above the target and remains steady for the past five years. Figure 3.15 and Figure 3.16 show the five year trend in the age distribution of applications finalised.

Figure 3.15 Applications finalised within 12 months, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 92% 92% 93% 93% 93% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

% finalised within 12 months Target (75%)

52 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Figure 3.16 All applications, time to finalise, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 87% 87% 86% 84% 85% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 7% 7% 6% 7% 7% 10% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 2% 3% 2% 0% 0–6 months 6–12 months 12–24 months 24+ months REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Age of reserved judgments delivered The Court aims to deliver 75 per cent of reserved judgments within three months of the completion of a trial. The Court met this target in 2015–16 as 570 (80 per cent) of the 715 reserved judgments (excluding judgments on appeal cases) were delivered within that timeframe. Figure 3.17 shows the five year trend of reserved judgments delivered within three months and Figure 3.18 shows the breakdown of time to deliver reserved judgments.

Figure 3.17 Reserved judgments delivered within three months, 2011–12 to 2015–16 (all reserved judgments)

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40%

30% 20% 10% 77% 75% 77% 78% 80% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Within 3 months Target (75%)

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 53 3

Figure 3.18 Time to deliver reserved judgments, 2011–12 to 2015–16 (all reserved judgments)

800 715 700 647 73 600 577 598 62 72 515 47 65 80 500 46 99 70 71 400

300

200

100 398 431 463 505 570 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE

Within 3 months More than 3 but less than 6 months More than 6 months

Judicial services complaints Judges are accountable through the public nature of their work, the requirement that they give reasons for their decisions, and the scrutiny of their decisions on appeal. In 2015–16, the Court received 81 complaints relating to judges or judicial registrars— 41 concerning judicial conduct and 40 on the time taken in delivery of a judgment. This represented 0.4 per cent of all applications filed (20,418), under the Portfolio Budget Statements target of one per cent (when judicial services complaints and administrative complaints are combined they total 0.7 per cent). The number of judicial services complaints received by the Court in 2015–16 is shown in Figure 3.19, which also shows the breakdown between complaints about judicial conduct and complaints about delays.

Figure 3.19 Total judicial services complaints, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100 88 87 91 90 81 80

70 49 53 51 40 60 45 50

40 17 30 20 10 28 35 36 42 41 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Conduct Delays

54 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

National coverage as appellate court

Summary of appeal caseload The Court’s Appeal Division deals with all Full Court appeals. The matters are from decrees of the Family Court of Australia, the Family Court of Western Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Table 3.3 summarises the appeals workload. More information about appeals is in Part 4 of this report.

Table 3.3 Appeal caseload, 2011–12 to 2015–16

2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 % change Appeals filed 374 318 330 389 371 -5%

Appeals finalised 328 334 337 356 354 -1% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT Appeals pending 279 263 256 289 270 -7%

Social justice and equity impacts

Unrepresented litigants The Court monitors the proportion of unrepresented litigants as one measure of the complexity of its caseload. Unrepresented litigants present a layer of complexity because they need more assistance to navigate the Court system and require additional help and guidance to abide by the Family Law Rules and procedures. However, the use of legal representation can indicate that the parties consider their matter to be complex and best handled by legal representatives. Figure 3.20 shows litigants who had representation at some point in their proceedings and Figure 3.21 shows the proportion of litigants who had representation at the finalisation of their trial. The proportion of the Court’s cases and trials involving legal representation remain relatively steady for the past five years. Note: The Court has revised its counting rule for these figures and as such the values in this section differ from those published in previous reports. The figure now excludes cases that did not have a first court event (i.e. withdrew or discontinued before appearing at court) and so they had not really proceeded beyond filing. These cases often did not have legal representation parties included on their records as it was often incomplete as parties had not provided this information at the time of filing (whether or not they were represented).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 55 3

Figure 3.20 Proportion of litigants’ representation status, finalised cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2011–12 78 17 5

2012–13 78 17 5

2013–14 78 17 5

2014–15 78 18 4

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE 2015–16 77 18 5

Both have representation One party had representation

Neither have representation

Figure 3.21 Proportion of litigants’ representation status, at trials, 2011–12 to 2015–16

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

2011–12 67 28 5

2012–13 64 27 9

2013–14 59 32 9

2014–15 63 28 9

2015–16 63 26 11

Both representatives present One party representative present

No representatives present

56 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Family violence and abuse (or risk) Under section 60K of the Family Law Act, the Court must consider and take action on notices of risk of abuse or family violence. The prescribed notice is to be considered within seven days and dealt with within 28 days of filing. On 7 June 2012, the definition of what constitutes family violence was amended to more broadly define such acts that could fall under the reasoning for filing a Notice of Child Abuse, Family Violence or Risk of Family Violence. This had an immediate impact on the courts and significantly increased the number of such applications being filed with final order cases. Figure 3.22 shows that in 2015–16, the trend towards filing a Notice of Child Abuse, Family Violence or Risk of Family Violence has increased, adding additional workload to court resources. This reflects the growing awareness of family violence within the community and the need for litigants to raise family violence in conformity with the 2012 amendments. It also reflects the increasing complexity of the Court's cases and the extent to which violence is an element in most of them.

Figure 3.22 Notices of child abuse or risk of family violence filed, 2011–12 to 2015–16 REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT 700

600

500

400

300

200

100 334 403 426 470 630 0 2011–12 2012–13* 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

* On 7 June 2012, new definitions and rules on Family Violence were enacted.

Figure 3.23 Proportion of final order cases in which a notice of child abuse or risk of family violence is filed, 2011–12 to 2015–16

25% 20.9%

20% 16.0% 14.1% 14.4% 15%

10.1% 10%

0% 2011–12 2012–13* 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

* On 7 June 2012, new definitions and rules on Family Violence were enacted.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 57 3

Magellan cases Magellan cases involve allegations of serious physical abuse or sexual abuse of a child and undergo special case management. When a Magellan case is identified, it is managed by a small team consisting of a judge, a registrar and a family consultant. Magellan case management relies on collaborative and highly coordinated processes and procedures. A crucial aspect is strong interagency coordination, in particular with state and territory child protection agencies. This ensures that problems are dealt with efficiently and that high-quality information is shared. An independent children’s lawyer is appointed in every Magellan case, for which legal aid is uncapped. Typically, a Magellan case is one where a notice of abuse or family violence is filed, although not all notices will necessarily result in the case being classified as a Magellan matter. The Court assesses and determines, from the issues raised, the matters that are managed under the Magellan program. Therefore, it does not automatically follow that an increase in the filing of notices of abuse or family violence with its wider definitions would automatically mean a higher number of Magellan cases. REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE Figure 3.24 details the number of Magellan cases commenced and finalised in the past five years.

Figure 3.24 Magellan cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16

200 180 160 140 120 100

80 60 40 20 160 149 141 177 177 145 129 117 116 121 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Magellan cases started Magellan cases finalised

58 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE STATEMENT

Registry services u Introductory statement

I, Warwick Soden, as the accountable authority of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court administration, present the 2015–16 annual performance statements of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court administration, as required under paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). In my opinion, these annual performance statements are based on properly maintained records, accurately reflect the performance of the entity, and comply with subsection 39(2) of the PGPA Act. REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

WG Soden Principal Registrar and Chief Executive Officer Federal Court of Australia u Family Court and Federal Circuit Court entity purpose

The objective of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court entity is to assist the respective courts to achieve their stated purposes by: >> maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations >> providing effective and efficient registry services >> effectively and efficiently managing resources >> providing effective information and communication techniques. u Results

Performance criterion Although a single entity for the purposes of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, the Family Court of Australia remains a separate Chapter III court under the Australian Constitution and the Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) applicable to the Court are identified in the 2015–16 Portfolio Budget Statements and in the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Corporate Plan 2015–2019. Whilst the Court’s reporting is for the single program, reporting information is provided in two streams: >> judicial services (maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations), and >> registry services (provision of effective and efficient registry services.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 59 3

The Court uses this approach to provide clearer reporting of its performance against its key performance indicators. The following discusses the performance of registry services in 2015–16.

Table 3.4 Key performance indictors – registry services, 2015–16

KPIs Estimated actual

National Enquiry Centre telephone enquiries answered within 80% 90 seconds

Counter enquiries served within 20 minutes 75%

Email enquiries responded to within two working days 80%

Applications lodged processed within two working days 75% REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE

Criterion source >> Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Corporate Plan 2015–2019. >> Component 1.1.3 key performance indicators, Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Portfolio Budget Statements 2015–16.

Result against performance criterion Registry services are provided to people who wish to file an application or are considering filing an application in the Family Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Registry services include: >> provision of effective support to the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia >> family law telephone and referral services, and >> family law document processing.

These services are complemented by the services of the National Enquiry Centre to which all family law 1300 telephone calls, enquiry emails and live chats are received in the first instance, as well as follow up enquiries from parties or lawyers about their Family Court or Federal Circuit Court files. During 2015–16, family law registries and the NEC provided a high level of service to clients and other users of the courts and to the judiciary of both courts. The NEC responded to increased demand in emails and calls relating to Commonwealth Courts Portal support, as well as a 30 per cent increase in the number of live chats received. Three of the four registry services KPIs were met. The fourth KPI, with a target of 80 per cent of telephone calls to the NEC being answered in 90 seconds, was not met. The NEC continues to try to improve this area by streamlining process and introducing new initiatives such as Live Chat. The KPI for complaints as a percentage of total applications was met this year. Table 3.5 summarises the performance of the various registry services functions of the Court against Portfolio Budget Statement KPIs from 2011–12 to 2015–16. Please note the data in

60 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3 this table relates to services provided for both the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court by the family law registries and the NEC.

Table 3.5 Summary of performance against registry services KPIs, 2011–12 to 2015–16

Registry Services KPIs 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 result result result result result 75% of all counter enquiries are 88% 93% 92% 91% 92% served within 20 minutes

75% of applications lodged are 97% 97% 98% 97% 98% processed within two working days

80% of calls answered within 33% 21% 28% 34% 24% 90 seconds (NEC only)

80% of emails answered within 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% two days (NEC data only) PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT

Number of KPI/targets achieved 3 3 3 3 3

u Analysis of performance against purpose

Family law registries There are 19 family law registries. These are in every state and territory (except Western Australia). Family law registries provide services to both the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court. The key functions of the registries are to: >> provide information and advice about court procedures, services and forms, external options and referrals to community organisations that enable clients to take informed and appropriate action >> ensure that available information is provided in an accurate and timely fashion to support the best outcome through file management and quality assurance—from the initiation of proceedings, to hearing and to archiving >> make the best use of court time by facilitating an orderly, secure flow of clients’ files and exhibits >> enhance community confidence and respect by responding to clients’ needs and assisting with making the court experience a more positive one >> progress cases by providing administrative services in accordance with court processes and to manage external relationships to assist with the resolution of cases >> schedule and prioritise matters for hearing and intervention to achieve the earliest resolution or determination >> monitor and control the flow of cases, and >> assist in the evaluation of caseloads by reporting on trends and exceptions to facilitate improvements in processes and allocation of resources.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 61 3

Counter enquiries Staff working on the counters in family law registries handle general enquiries, lodge documents relating to proceedings, provide copies of documents and/or orders and facilitate the viewing of court files and subpoenas. Registry services staff provide an efficient and effective service when dealing with litigants in person and the legal profession face-to-face at registry counters across Australia. It is estimated that the registries dealt with 217,628 counter enquiries in 2015–16 from clients or other people seeking information face-to-face. This compared to 225,101 counter enquiries in 2014–15. In 2015–16, an estimated 92 per cent of clients were served within 20 minutes, against a target of 75 per cent, compared to 91 per cent in 2014–15.

Document processing Family law registries receive and process applications lodged at registry counters and in the

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE mail. The service target of 75 per cent being processed within two working days of receipt was significantly exceeded (98 per cent of applications were processed within that timeframe).

National Enquiry Centre The National Enquiry Centre (NEC) continued to provide family law telephone, email and Live Chat support services to the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court in 2015–16. The NEC’s responsibilities include: >> first telephone contact to the courts via the 1300 number >> first email contact to the courts via [email protected] >> first contact to the courts via Live Chat from the websites >> a large proportion of telephone and email contacts from existing parties, lawyers and other court stakeholders >> support for users of the Commonwealth Courts Portal including the Family Court of Western Australia and the Federal Court of Australia >> after hours service >> printing of divorce orders >> printing of event-based fee statements >> processing of proof of divorce requests, and >> Twitter notifications of procedural and registry information.

Enquiries are received via three public channels: telephone via the 1300 number; emails via [email protected]; and via Live Chat. The NEC’s focus is to provide parties and stakeholders with appropriate information as efficiently and simply as possible through these channels. Callers to the 1300 number are given options depending on the nature of their call. These include divorce, Portal support and general enquiries. These three options are supported by agents with the skill sets required to answer the enquiry. Emails and live chats are monitored by staff trained in responding to written requests.

62 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

With the growth of Portal registrations, Portal support was a major factor contributing to the work of the NEC in 2015–16. The NEC regularly refers parties to various stakeholders including the Family Relationships Advice Line (FRAL), legal aid, government agencies and community legal centres. The NEC has maintained a close relationship with FRAL and regularly consults with them. The NEC continued its commitment to support staff in their work and encourages a collaborative work place by: >> providing ongoing coaching and training >> enhancing wellbeing by providing ergonomic training assessment to all staff >> providing peer support and mentoring >> ensuring information knowledge management systems are up-to-date, and >> holding regular meetings with staff to provide a two-way process of information flow. REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT Summary of NEC performance >> The NEC did not meet the KPI for the percentage of calls answered within 90 seconds, achieving a service level of 24 per cent, which is down compared to 34 per cent last year. >> Callers waited an average of seven minutes and 30 seconds for their call to be answered, compared to five minutes and 17 seconds in 2014–15. >> The average time of a call was five minutes and two seconds, compared to four minutes and 22 seconds in 2014–15. >> The NEC received a total of 286,476 calls (compared to 330,178 calls in 2014–15). Of these calls, 158,100 were queued to talk to a staff member. The 13 per cent decrease in calls to the NEC (compared with calls in 2014–15) can be attributed to better service at the first point of contact by emailed information; there being no requirement to call back; better structured and more interactive information on the websites; increased use of the Portal; and increased use of Live Chat. >> 28,584 calls were received for Portal support. The average time for a Portal call is significantly more, as technical support is required. The average time of a Portal call is seven minutes. >> 5352 calls (or four per cent of calls) abandoned while queued. This met the NEC’s internal target of less than five per cent of calls abandoned when queued. >> 696 calls were transferred to a family law registry by the NEC. Staff are aware of the importance of completing the transaction at the first point of contact, and only transfer calls if absolutely necessary. This represents only one per cent of calls transferred, which is significantly less than the internal target of less than 10 per cent of calls transferred to a registry. >> 24,036 emails were sent in response to an email enquiry. >> 73,152 emails were sent in response to a telephone enquiry, compared with 74,842 in 2014–15. >> 12,348 proof of divorce requests were processed. This is a three per cent decrease from 2014–15, but indicative of better self-service options now available.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 63 3 REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE

>> 86,880 divorce orders were printed and posted to clients. >> 178 calls were received by the After Hours Service, of which seven were actioned by a registrar. Of these, six orders were made by a judge. >> 66,336 live chats, or an average of 261 per day, were received this year. This is a 30 per cent increase since last year.

Table 3.6 National Enquiry Centre performance, 2011–12 to 2015–16

KPIs and internal targets 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 80% of calls answered within 45% 21% 28% 34% 24% 90 seconds

Less than 5% of calls 8% 5% 3% 3% 4% abandoned when queued*

Less than 10% of calls 1% 1% 1% 1% 1% transferred to a registry*

80% of emails answered 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% within two days

* Internal NEC target.

64 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 3

Client feedback and complaints management

The Family Court is committed to responding effectively to feedback and complaints, and to complying with Australian Standard AS ISO 10002—2006 (complaints handling) and the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Better Practice Guide to Complaint Handling. The Court’s client feedback management system allows all areas of the Court to efficiently and consistently manage complaints and client feedback, while also identifying clients’ issues and monitoring trends. The Court has a: >> complaints and feedback policy >> judicial complaints procedure, and >> complaints and feedback form.

The complaints and feedback form explains how clients can make complaint or provide feedback to the Court. This can be found on the homepage of the Family Court website PERFORMANCE REPORT ON COURT (www.familycourt.gov.au). Clients can address complaints or feedback to the Court in writing, orally, or by email to [email protected]. Complaints made about judicial conduct or delays in delivery of judgments are referred to the Judicial Complaints Advisor. The Court aims to acknowledge receipt of a complaint within five working days and, where possible, to send a formal response within 20 working days of receipt of the complaint. During 2015–16, the Family Court recorded: >> 55 complaints about administrative matters. These are complaints relating to family law registries which service both the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, and include complaints about court administrative procedures and processes, staff personal conduct, privacy, security and the client feedback process >> 40 complaints about judicial delays and 41 about judicial conduct (see Figure 3.19). These matters are referred to the Judicial Complaints Advisor in the Chambers of the Deputy Chief Justice, and >> 30 compliments.

At 55, the number of administrative complaints represented 0.3 per cent of all applications received. Combined with 81 judicial complaints (see judicial services complaints on page 54 for more detail) complaints represented 0.7 per cent of applications received, thus achieving against the KPI (for complaints to be no more than one per cent of applications received). Figure 3.25 provides a breakdown across ten categories of administrative complaints issues in 2015–16. During 2015–16, the Court also recorded 109 complaints about matters as family law legislation, matters in other jurisdictions, family assessment processes and reports prepared by family consultants for judicial proceedings, and the conduct and outcomes of judicial proceedings. These are matters that may not be addressed by the administration of the Court as they concern matters of law reform on the one hand, and the conduct of specific judicial proceedings on the other.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 65 3

Figure 3.25 Administration complaints, 2015–16

Personal conduct Family Court policy, 0 registrar, 3

Personal conduct family consultant, 4

Administrative process, 21

Personal conduct administrative staff, 21

REPORT ON COURT PERFORMANCE Procedural information, 3 Privacy, 1 Client feedback process, 1 Security, 1

As a result of client feedback during 2015–16, aside from issues being resolved for clients on an individual basis, the Court was able to implement the following: >> more helpful information added to brochures and the websites and corrections made to erroneous contact information >> review of sound level of recorded telephone information provision service >> revisions to publications with regard to the definition of family; wording changed in the children’s pages of the website; adjustments made to the voiceover for videos; and a review of content of printed material for next print run, and >> consideration of facility to capture and save online chat facility.

66 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 67 IN FOCUS

Let’s Talk: Cultural Competence eLearning

The Let’s Talk Cultural Competence eLearning package provides court staff with the knowledge, skills and awareness needed to work competently with culturally diverse clients across a range of service scenarios. Using a specifically built website, the package uses adult learning principles to deliver over two hours of training that combines text with videos, podcasts, TED talks, interactive scenarios, quizzes, reflection exercises and links. Let’s Talk: Cultural Competency is designed specifically for those in courts who provide services to people from culturally and linguistically diverse (CaLD) backgrounds. While much of the content applies to all courts, specific examples and practices are focused on family law. The training includes: >> An Introduction to Cultural Competency >> Module 1: Multicultural Australia >> Module 2: Understanding culture >> Module 3: Intercultural communication >> Module 4: New arrivals to Australia >> Module 5: Working with interpreters and translators >> Module 6: Using plain English

This program is adapted from Western Australian Government, Office of Multicultural Interests’ Diverse WA cultural competency training program. OVERVIEW OF THEAPPEALS COURT

42 4

APPEALS APPEALS

ANNUAL PERFORMANCE STATEMENT

u Introductory statement

I, Warwick Soden, as the accountable authority of the Family Court of Australia, present the 2015–16 annual performance statements of the Family Court of Australia, as required under paragraph 39(1)(a) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). In my opinion, these annual performance statements are based on properly maintained records, accurately reflect the performance of the entity, and comply with subsection 39(2) of the PGPA Act.

WG Soden Principal Registrar and Chief Executive Officer Federal Court of Australia

u Family Court of Australia purpose

u Results

70 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 4

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has one outcome and one program on which it reports in 2015–16. See Figure 4.1.

Figure 4.1 The outcome and program of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court APPEALS

Outcome 1 Provide access to justice for litigants in family and federal law matters within the jurisdiction of the courts through the provision of judicial and support services.

Program 1.1 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court

Whilst the Court’s reporting is for the single program, reporting information is provided in two streams: >> judicial services (maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations), and >> registry services (provision of effective and efficient registry services).

The Court uses this approach to provide clearer reporting of its performance against its KPIs. This chapter reports on the performance of the Appeal Division in 2015–16. Although there are no specific KPIs for appeals, the Court reports on this as per its purpose of providing national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.

Criterion source >> Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Corporate Plan 2015–2019. >> Component 1.1.1 key performance indicators, Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Portfolio Budget Statements 2015–16.

Result against performance criterion

Appeal Division Sections 21A, 22(2AA), (2AB) and (2AC) of the Family Law Act 1975 provide for an Appeal Division for the Family Court. The members of the Appeal Division of the Court are the Chief Justice, the Deputy Chief Justice and such other judges, not exceeding nine in number, as are assigned to the Appeal Division. At 30 June 2016, the judges assigned to the Appeal Division were: >> Justice Finn >> Justice May >> Justice Thackray (Chief Judge of the Family Court of Western Australia) >> Justice Strickland

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 71 4

>> Justice Ainslie-Wallace >> Justice Ryan >> Justice Murphy APPEALS >> Justice Aldridge, and >> Justice Kent.

The Full Court of the Family Court of Australia is made up of three or more judges of the Court; the majority must be members of the Appeal Division (Family Law Act 1975 s 4).

Appeals The appellate jurisdiction of the Family Court is defined in Part X of the Family Law Act 1975, in Part VIII of the Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988 and Part 7 of the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (the ‘Child Support Acts’). An appeal lies to the Full Court from a decree of the Family Court, constituted otherwise than as a Full Court, exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act and (with leave) under the Child Support Acts. An appeal also lies to the Full Court of the Family Court from a decree of the Family Court of Western Australia, or the Supreme Court of a state or a territory constituted by a single judge, exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act and (with leave) under the Child Support Acts. An appeal also lies to the Family Court of Australia from a decree of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act and (with leave) the Child Support Acts, and from a decree of the Magistrates Court of Western Australia constituted by a Family Law Magistrate. The jurisdiction of the Court in relation to such appeals is to be exercised by a Full Court unless the Chief Justice considers it appropriate for a single judge to exercise the jurisdiction of the Court (s 94AAA(3)).

Full Court sittings During 2015–16, the Full Court sat for 23 weeks (including in some weeks judges hearing appeals in different locations or two Full Courts sitting simultaneously in the same location). The Court publishes details of these sittings. In addition, the Full Court conducts special sittings as required, for example to hear urgent appeals. Judges of the Appeal Division also hear appeals from the Federal Circuit Court as a single judge exercising the jurisdiction of the Court during other weeks of the year.

72 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 4

Administration of appeals Appeals are administered by an Appeals Registrar in three regions: >> Northern—Queensland, northern New South Wales and the Northern Territory APPEALS >> Eastern—eastern, western and southern New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory, and >> Southern—Victoria, South Australia and Tasmania.

Western Australia is separately administered by a registrar of the Family Court of Western Australia. u Analysis of performance against purpose

Trends in appeals As a result of data quality activities conducted on appellate proceedings in the Court’s electronic case management system, the Court has updated the historical data for the previous years. This means that figures published in this section may not be the same as those published in previous annual reports. Many factors affect the number of appeals commenced in the Court. These include the number of first instance matters disposed of in the two courts and whether legislative changes impact the jurisdiction of the Court. The number of appeals filed in 2015–16 decreased by five per cent from 389 in 2014–15 to 371. In 2014–15 appeals filed had increased by 18 per cent to 389 from 330 in 2013–14. The number of appeals finalised decreased slightly from 356 to 354. The pending (active) cases as at 30 June 2016 was 270, which has decreased by seven per cent from 289 as at 30 June 2015. The Court is working hard to increase the disposal rate for Family Court appeals. In 2015–16, 17 per cent more appeals from the Family Court of Australia were finalised than the previous year (168 – increased from 143). The largest proportion of appeals is filed in the Eastern region. The Court has increased the number of sittings in this region (predominantly sitting in Sydney but extending to other locations, for example Canberra, as appropriate) and anticipates this will reflect in the clearance rates in future financial years. There was a seven per cent decrease in the number of appeals filed from decisions of the Federal Circuit Court (201 cases), whilst appeals filed from decisions of the Family Court decreased slightly to 170. Forty-one of 185 appeals from the Federal Circuit Court finalised in 2015–16 were dealt with by a single judge and did not require the convening of a bench of three or more judges. Table 4.1 and Figure 4.2 show the trend in Notices of Appeal filed, finalised and pending during the last five financial years.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 73 4

Table 4.1 Notice of Appeals filed, finalised and pending by jurisdiction, 2011–12 to 2015–16

Filed 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 % change from

APPEALS 2014–15 to 2015–16 Family Court of Australia 161 152 151 173 170 -2%

Federal Circuit Court 213 166 179 216 201 -7% of Australia

Appeals filed 374 318 330 389 371 -5%

Per cent from 43% 48% 46% 44% 46% 2% Family Court of Australia

Per cent from Federal 57% 52% 54% 56% 54% -2% Circuit Court of Australia

Finalised 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 % change from 2014–15 to 2015–16 Family Court of Australia 140 150 150 143 168 17%

Federal Circuit Court 188 184 187 213 186 -13% of Australia

Appeals finalised 328 334 337 356 354 -1%

Per cent from 43% 45% 45% 40% 47% 7% Family Court of Australia

Per cent from Federal 57% 55% 55% 60% 53% -7% Circuit Court of Australia

Pending 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 % change from 2014–15 to 2015–16 Family Court of Australia 141 143 144 174 145 -17%

Federal Circuit Court 138 120 112 115 125 9% of Australia

Appeals pending 279 263 256 289 270 -7%

Per cent from 51% 54% 56% 60% 54% -6% Family Court of Australia

Per cent from Federal 49% 46% 44% 40% 46% 6% Circuit Court of Australia

74 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 4

Figure 4.2 Notice of appeals, 2011–12 to 2015–16

450 400 APPEALS 350

300

250

200

150

100

50 374 328 279 318 334 263 330 337 25 6 38 9 35 6 28 9 371 35 4 270 0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Filed Finalised Pending

In addition to the Notice of Appeal, appellate proceedings may include a cross-appeal and a number of other applications filed seeking orders directly relating to the appeal. These may include applications for extension of time to appeal, to reinstate, expedite, stay or summarily dismiss appeals, security for costs, provision of transcript and to receive further evidence. Such applications are a significant resource burden on the Appeal Division and they generally require interlocutory hearings and judgments prior to, and on occasions during the hearing of the appeal. Table 4.2 shows the number of these additional applications that are filed.

Table 4.2 Other applications filed in appeal cases, 2011–12 to 2015–16

Filed 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 Application for Extension of Time 39 28 63 63 45

Application in an Appeal 237 235 249 250 290

Notice of Cross-Appeal 16 10 11 14 11

The proportion of family law appeals arising from decrees of the Family Court has risen slightly from 44 per cent in 2014–15 to 46 per cent in 2015–16. Figure 4.3 shows the proportion of appeal filings resulting from a decree made either in the Federal Circuit Court or in the Family Court.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 75 4

Figure 4.3 Proportion of notices of appeal filed by jurisdiction of decree, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% APPEALS 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 43% 57% 48% 52% 46% 54% 44 % 56 % 46% 54% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Family Court of Australia Federal Circuit Court

The proportion of appeals that were allowed or dismissed during 2015–16 decreased slightly by three per cent to 55 per cent. During 2015–16, the total number of appeals abandoned or withdrawn increased as compared with 2014–15. The number of abandoned appeals increased from 57 to 64 and the number of withdrawn appeals increased from 91 to 95. Figure 4.4 shows the trend in the manner in which appeals were finalised.

Figure 4.4 Notices of appeal finalised by type of finalisation, 2011–12 to 2015–16

120 111 109 112 96 96 96 99 95 100 93 92 91 87 86 82 80 69 67 64 57 57 60 50

0 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Allowed Dismissed Abandoned Withdrawn

76 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 4

Figure 4.5 Proportion of notices of appeal finalised by type of finalisation, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% 25% 26%27% 26% 27% APPEALS 80% 70% 17% 15% 16% 20% 18% 60%

50% 26% 29% 21% 27% 40% 28% 30% 20% 10% 29% 33% 32% 31% 27% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Allowed Dismissed Abandoned Withdrawn

Appeal demographics The historical trend in gender remains generally consistent, although there was a small decrease in the proportion of males lodging appeals (55 per cent) than females (42 per cent) (Figure 4.6). Figure 4.7 shows a continued trend towards self-representation. In 2015–16, the proportion of unrepresented appellants increased to 44 per cent from 39 per cent in 2014–15.

Figure 4.6 Proportion of appellants by gender, 2011–12 to 2015–16

2% 3% 3% 100% 5% 5% 90% 80% 70% 56% 60%54% 57%55% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 39%38% 41% 40%42% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Female Male Other

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 77 4

Figure 4.7 Proportion of appellants’ representation status, 2011–12 to 2015–16

100% 90% APPEALS 80% 70% 64%64% 62% 61% 56% 60% 50% 39% 37% 36% 39% 40% 44% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

Represented Unrepresented

Age of finalised appeals Of the appeals finalised in 2015–16, 77 per cent were finalised within 12 months, up two per cent on the prior year. Figure 4.8 shows the time taken to finalise appeals over the past five years.

Figure 4.8 Months to finalise appeals, 2011–12 to 2015–16

40%

35%

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5% 5% 4% 5% 2% 2% 33% 28% 34 % 35 % 32 % 20% 20% 21% 21% 25% 23% 25% 20% 19% 20% 22% 25% 21% 21% 18% 0% 0–3 months 3–6 months 6–12 months 12–24 months 24+ months

2011–12 2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16

78 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 4

Appeals to the High Court of Australia Section 95 of the Family Law Act 1975 provides that an appeal does not lie to the High Court from a decree of a court exercising jurisdiction under the Family Law Act, whether original or appellate, except by special leave of the High Court. APPEALS During 2015–16: >> 25 applications for special leave to appeal were filed in the High Court from judgments of the Family Court >> 23 applications for special leave were determined or disposed of by the High Court: 21 were refused, one deemed abandoned and one granted, and >> the one appeal heard by the High Court was dismissed.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 79 IN FOCUS

Why am I seeing a Family Consultant?

Information for kids aged 5–8 and 9–12 When the courts’ new websites were launched in May 2015, the children’s pages were also rewritten and specific landing pages for children were developed. There were six key principles in the redesign of the kids’ pages: 4. Comprehensive and robust information that answers possible questions. 5. Information must be presented in accessible and age-appropriate way. 6. The pages must be visually appealing (use of appropriate colour schemes, graphics, pictures, videos). 7. There should be appropriate consideration for links and other services (e.g. Kids Helpline). 8. The pages should include ample mechanism for children to have questions answered by staff within the Court, such as NEC phone numbers and Live Chat. 9. There should be greater reliance on multimedia rather than simply asking children to read static information from the screen.

In meeting these principles, the courts have developed two new videos for children who are scheduled to meet with a family consultant at the Court. >> Why am I seeing a family consultant – for children aged 5-8 >> Why am I seeing a family consultant – for children aged 9-12 Coming to a court building and meeting with a family consultant can be a daunting experience for some children. The videos explain the process and help children understand what to expect. The videos cover common questions such as: >> What is a family consultant? >> Why do I have to see a family consultant? >> What happens when I see a family consultant? >> Who gets to know what I say? >> How do judges decide what is best for kids?

With a simple, age-appropriate format, the videos are a great addition to the children’s pages on the court websites.

The videos are available: On the Court’s website www.familycourt.gov.au > For public > Kids and young people > 5-8 year olds www.familycourt.gov.au > For public > Kids and young people > 9-12 year olds

On the Court’s YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/familycourtAU 82 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHYOVERVIEW OF JUDGMENTSTHE COURT

25 5

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS

In 2015–16, judges of the Family Court of Australia handed down judgments at both first instance and appellate levels. The decisions reflect the Court’s expansive jurisdiction, the wide variety of issues that it addresses, and its position as a superior specialist federal court that deals with the most complex and serious family law cases. A selection of significant and noteworthy judgments are published in this report. The Court recognises that the accessibility of its judgments to the public is important. It commits the resources required to ensure that every final judgment delivered is anonymised and published consistent with s 121 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). Virtually all judgments, after anonymisation, are published in full text on the Australasian Legal Information Institute (AustLII) website. There is a link to the AustLII site from the Court’s website (www.familycourt.gov.au).

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY Recent decisions are also published on the Court’s website: full court decisions are published for two months and first instance judgments are published for one month. This policy has enabled the Court to better respond to community interest and concerns about particular cases highlighted in the media and demonstrates the commitment of the Court to being open and accountable for its judgments.

JANSSEN & JANSSEN

[2015] FamCAFC 168 (Strickland, Ryan and Aldridge JJ) – delivered on 4 September 2015.

Appeal – transfer of proceedings – jurisdiction In this appeal the Full Court considered what jurisdiction, if any, remains with the Federal Circuit Court after an order made by that court transferring proceedings to the Family Court pursuant to s 39 of the Federal Circuit Court Act 1999 (Cth) (“the FCC Act”) has been made. The appeal was brought by the mother who argued that interim parenting orders made by a Federal Circuit Court judge after a transfer order had been made were made in excess of jurisdiction and were therefore a nullity. The father opposed the appeal, arguing that by virtue of s 39(5), the Federal Circuit Court retained jurisdiction to make such interim orders as it considers necessary and in aid of the transfer. By way of background, the mother initiated proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court in relation to the parties’ three children in October 2013. On 19 December 2013 the primary judge made interim orders providing for the mother to have sole parental responsibility for the children, for the children to live with her and have regular telephone contact with the father. In January 2014 the father was convicted of two offences of “common assault

84 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 5 and stalk and intimidate” in relation to his behaviour towards the mother. An apprehended violence order was also made. In February 2014 the father filed an interim application seeking to spend time with the children, initially under supervision. On 9 April 2014 the primary judge heard that application and reserved his decision. In August 2014 the father’s convictions and the apprehended violence order were set aside by the District Court of NSW. On 21 January 2015 the mother filed an application for interim restraining orders. That application came before the primary judge on 8 April 2015 and on that day his Honour made an order transferring the proceedings to the Family Court pursuant to s 39 of the FCC Act. Subsequently, on 30 June 2015, almost three months after making the transfer order, the primary judge made interim parenting orders in relation to the father’s interim application filed in February 2014. In its reasons for judgment, the Full Court first sets out the provisions of s 39 of the FCC Act governing the transfer of proceedings. Relevantly it sets out s 39(1) which provides that an order for transfer may be made to the Family Court where a proceeding is pending in the Federal Circuit Court. It then sets out the terms of s 39(5) which provides that: If an order is made under subsection (1), the Federal Circuit Court of Australia may make such orders as it considers necessary pending the disposal of the proceeding by … the Family Court, as the case requires.

The Full Court then discusses the provisions of s 19 of the FCC Act which provides that, JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY subject to limited exceptions, proceedings must not be instituted in the Federal Circuit Court “in respect of a particular matter if proceedings in respect of an associated matter are pending in the Family Court”. The Full Court held the effect of this provision is that: 31. … there can only be one proceeding between the parties under the [Family Law Act 1975 (Cth)] pending at the same time in the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court. In other words, there cannot be parallel proceedings in each of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court in respect of the same matter. The Full Court continues: 32. It is against this background that s 39 and s 39(5) of the FCC Act in particular must be construed. Section 39 is concerned with the circumstances under which the Federal Circuit Court may transfer proceedings pending in that court to the Family Court (and Federal Court) and the consequences of an order of that type. In relation to s 39(5), it is important that the provision commences with the words “if an order is made”. The use of these words provides a temporal nexus between the order for transfer (s 39(1)) and the power of the Federal Circuit Court to make orders pending disposal of the transferred proceedings by the Family Court. The use of present tense in s 39(5) indicates that the power conferred by s 39(5) is to be exercised contemporaneously with the power to transfer contained in s 39(1). In other words, after the contemporaneous exercise of power pursuant to ss 39(1) and 39(5), there will not be proceedings pending in the Federal Circuit Court in relation to which that court is seized of jurisdiction. The Full Court therefore held that the interim parenting orders made by the primary judge in this case, after the transfer of proceedings, were made in excess of jurisdiction and, as the Federal Circuit Court is not a superior court of record, were therefore a nullity. Having found error, the Full Court allowed the appeal and set aside the orders appealed.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 85 5

GHAZEL & GHAZEL AND ANOR

[2016] FamCAFC 31 (Finn, May and Austin JJ) – delivered 4 March 2016.

Appeal – recognition of foreign potentially polygamous marriages – effect of Marriage Amendment Act 2004 (Cth) In this matter the wife appealed an order which dismissed her application for a declaration that her Iranian marriage to the husband was valid pursuant to the provisions of the Marriage Act 1961 (Cth). The key question for the Full Court on appeal was whether a potentially polygamous foreign marriage will be recognised as a valid marriage under Part VA of the Marriage Act having regard to amendments made to that Part by the Marriage Amendment Act 2004 (Cth) (“the 2004 amendments”). Part VA contains the provisions providing for the recognition of foreign marriages. Both the husband and wife were self-represented on appeal and because the case raised a matter affecting the public interest, the Full Court requested that the Attorney-General intervene in the proceedings. The Attorney-General was represented in the appeal by the Solicitor-General. The husband in this case was born in Iran and the wife was born in England. The parties

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY married in 1981 according to the law of Iran. The parties’ marriage in Iran was described by the Full Court as a “potentially polygamous marriage”, meaning a marriage where a man may, but has yet to, marry more than one wife. The Full Court distinguished between this type of marriage and an actually polygamous marriage and confined its discussion to potentially polygamous marriages. In late 1981 the parties moved to England and underwent a marriage ceremony at an English Registry Office. In 2003 the wife and the parties’ children moved to Australia. The husband followed in 2005 and in 2007 the family became Australian citizens. In 2008 the parties filed a joint application for divorce in Australia and in that application they only referred to their marriage in England. A divorce was granted in March 2008. In 2011 the husband married another woman, Ms C, in Iran and, the wife alleged, he married Ms C in Australia in 2012. In November 2014 the wife filed an application seeking an order that her Iranian marriage to the husband be “declared valid” pursuant to the provisions of Part VA of the Marriage Act. The primary judge determined not to make the declaration and dismissed the wife’s application. As outlined above, the issue the Full Court had to consider on appeal was the effect, if any, the 2004 amendments had on the provisions of Part VA of the Marriage Act providing for the recognition of foreign marriages. The 2004 amendments inserted into the definition section (s 5(1)) of the principal Act the following definition of marriage: Marriage means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life. The 2004 amendments also inserted s 88B(4) into Part VA. That section reads: (4) To avoid doubt, in this Part … marriage has the meaning given by subsection 5(1).

86 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 5

The Full Court began its discussion by first considering whether a potentially polygamous marriage could be recognised as valid under the Marriage Act as it stood prior to the 2004 amendments. The Full Court accepted the Solicitor-General’s submissions as to the proper textual analysis of the statutory provisions and was also influenced by the argument that Part VA was intended to give effect to the Hague Convention on Celebration and Recognition of the Validity of Marriages. The Full Court therefore held in relation to the Act as it stood prior to the 2004 amendments: 41. ... a potentially polygamous marriage if recognised as valid in its place of celebration would be recognised as valid in Australia unless in the particular circumstances of the case one of the exceptions [provided for in Part VA] applied. Importantly, the Full Court also held no legislative exception to recognition expressly referred to potentially polygamous marriages. Having accepted that prior to the 2004 amendments, a potentially polygamous marriage would be recognised in Australia, the Full Court turned its consideration to the effect of those amendments. In its judgment the Full Court discussed in some detail academic analysis of the effect of the 2004 amendments which concluded that the importation of the definition of marriage meant that potentially polygamous marriages could no longer be recognised pursuant to the provisions of the Marriage Act. While noting the Solicitor-General’s

submission that this position had “some force”, the Full Court took the contrary view and JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY held that, notwithstanding the 2004 amendments, potentially polygamous marriages remain recognisable in Australia. In reaching this conclusion the Full Court was persuaded by the submission that the 2004 amendments were “entirely focused on the issue of same-sex marriages” and not polygamous marriages. The Full Court accepted that “where Parliament clearly did not contemplate that the 2004 amendments would affect any [marriages other than same sex marriages the] Court should strive against a construction that would have … broader ramifications”. The Full Court therefore concluded potentially polygamous marriages are still recognisable as valid pursuant to Part VA of the Marriage Act. The appeal was therefore allowed and the Full Court made a declaration that the Iranian marriage between the husband and wife was valid.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 87 5

MEDLOW & MEDLOW

[2016] FamCAFC 34 (May, Ryan and Aldridge JJ) – delivered on 8 March 2016.

Appeal – adoption of new test for leave to appeal In this appeal the Full Court adopted a new test for determining whether to grant leave to appeal pursuant to s 94AA of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth). In doing so, the Full Court brought the test applied in the Family Court into line with that used in the Federal Court. This matter involved two applications for leave to appeal brought by the wife in relation to two separate orders for interim property distribution made in favour of the husband. The effect of the interim orders sought to be appealed was that the husband would receive $2.9 million by way of interim property distribution. In its reasons for judgment the Full Court began its consideration of whether to grant leave to appeal by first outlining the test applied in the Family Court. Citing previous Full Court authority of Rutherford and Rutherford (1991) FLC 92-225, the Full Court articulated the test as being: 44. … the test that has been applied in this Court as to whether leave should be given is that the applicant for leave should establish an error of principle and/or a

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY substantial injustice. (emphasis added) The Full Court noted that this formulation of the test for leave to appeal was derived from Adam P Brown Male Fashions Proprietary Limited v Philip Morris Inc. and Anor (1981) 148 CLR 170 and that the High Court in that case also left open the issue of whether the test was conjunctive or disjunctive. The Full Court then contrasted this formulation of the test for leave to appeal with that applied in the Federal Court. The test applied in that court is: 46. … whether, in all the circumstances of the case, the decision is attended by sufficient doubt as to warrant it being reconsidered by the Full Court and whether substantial injustice would result if leave were refused supposing the decision to be wrong. (emphasis added) It can be seen that there are two relevant differences in the tests for leave to appeal. The first appears in the first limb of the test, being “error of principle” versus “sufficient doubt” and the second is that the test applied in the Federal Court is conjunctive. The Full Court cited with approval a previous Full Family Court judgment of Jess and Ors & Jess and Ors (2014) FLC 93-620 which had considered but not ultimately determined the correct test for leave to appeal. In that case the Full Court was supportive of adopting the test applied by the Federal Court to ensure a uniform approach to the issue of leave to appeal by the two federal intermediate appellate courts. The Full Court in this case ultimately determined to adopt the test for leave to appeal that is applied in the Federal Court. The Full Court emphasised, however, that: 55. … it is a litmus test to be applied in the general run of cases by always in the context of the unfettered discretion given by s 94AA. In appropriate cases, it being a test or a guideline, it will give way to the particular interests of justice in that case.

88 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 5

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SERVICES & PADWA

[2016] FamCAFC 57 (Bryant CJ, Murphy and Kent JJ) – delivered 15 April 2016.

Appeal – Hague Convention on Child Abduction – habitual residence This matter required the Full Court to consider the correct test for determining a child’s “habitual residence” as that term is found in the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction (“the Convention”) and the Family Law (Child Abduction) Regulations 1986 (Cth) (“the Regulations”). The orders appealed provided for the child the subject of the proceedings to return to Indonesia (which is not a signatory to the Convention) where her mother lived, rather than to the Netherlands where her father lived. The appeal was brought by the Secretary for the Department of Family and Community Services, acting as the Central Authority, at the request of the father. The appeal was opposed by the mother. The child in this case was born in 2009 in the Netherlands. Her father is a citizen and resident of the Netherlands and her mother is a citizen and resident of Indonesia. The mother and father had married in 2007 and resided in the Netherlands. After the child was born she lived in both Indonesia and the Netherlands. The parties separated in July 2012 and in May 2013 JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY they entered into a parenting plan agreement in the Netherlands. Between July 2010 and November 2013 the child lived for approximately 24 months in Indonesia with the mother and approximately 15 months in the Netherlands with both parents. The child began attending pre-school in Indonesia. From November 2013 until 17 October 2015 the child lived with the father in the Netherlands, where it was agreed between the parents that she would attend her first year of primary schooling. On 17 October 2015 the child travelled to Indonesia to spend time with the mother. The child was due to return to the Netherlands on 25 October 2015. On that date the mother informed the father she would not return the child. On 19 December 2015 the mother travelled with the child to Australia for a holiday. It was at that point that the father took action, Australia being a signatory to the Convention, and on 24 December 2015 the Central Authority filed an application pursuant to the Regulations seeking the return of the child to the Netherlands. The primary judge found that the child was not habitually resident in the Netherlands and ordered her to return to Indonesia. In its reasons for judgment the Full Court determined that the primary judge applied the incorrect test for habitual residence and therefore his ultimate finding that the child be returned to Indonesia was erroneous. The Full Court identified the sole issue for determination on appeal, and the correct test to be applied at first instance, was the question of whether the child was habitually resident in the Netherlands immediately prior to her retention in Australia on 19 December 2015. In reaching this conclusion the Full Court considered the two questions the primary judge posed for himself in determining the habitual residence of the child. After tracing through the history of the movement of the child, the primary judge posed the question as being, “what would the habitual residence of the child have been in November 2013?” The primary judge appeared to then make a finding that the answer to that question would be Indonesia. The trial judge then posed the question he had to answer as being, “[w]hat then has changed since November 2013 which might impact upon the determination of where the child is a habitual resident?”

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 89 5

The Full Court’s reasons make it clear that the question, as required by the Regulations, was not where the child was habitually resident in 2013, some two years prior to her retention, but where was the child habitually resident immediately prior to her retention in Australia in December 2015. After a careful analysis of the authorities the Full Court also emphasised that this question is to be considered “from the child’s perspective”. The Full Court held the only answer to that question available on the evidence was that the child was habitually resident in the Netherlands. The Full Court also considered a finding by the trial judge, apparently made as an alternative to the finding of habitual residence in Indonesia, that the child had two habitual residences, being Indonesia and the Netherlands. Noting that no ground of appeal was directed to challenging whether, as a matter of law, a finding of two habitual residences can be made, the Full Court said it was bound by existing Family Court authority that it is not possible to find that a child can simultaneously have more than one habitual residence. However, the Full Court then suggested that the High Court in LK v Director-General Department of Community Services (2009) 232 CLR 582 left open that possibility when they said: 25. … it is unlikely, although it is not necessary to exclude the possibility, that a person will be found to be habitually resident in more than one place at one time. In this case though the Full Court ultimately concluded that even if the child could be

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY habitually resident in the two countries, in circumstances where Indonesia is not a Convention country and the Netherlands is, and where proceedings were properly invoked pursuant to the Convention by the father who had rights of custody in the Netherlands, the child must be returned to the Netherlands. The Full Court therefore allowed the appeal and made orders providing for the child to return to the Netherlands.

90 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 5

FAUKLAND & SHIKIA

[2016] FamCAFC 83 (Bryant CJ, Ryan and Murphy JJ) – delivered 25 May 2016.

Appeal – sentences for contempt of court – consecutive sentences – indefinite suspension of sentences In this matter the husband appealed against the severity of sentences that had been imposed on him for contempt of court. The primary judge found that the husband was in contempt of court pursuant to s 112AP of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth) (“the Act”) in relation to two charges. Those charges arose from the husband’s non-compliance with two previous orders of the court. The primary judge sentenced him to three months imprisonment on each charge to be served consecutively, and ordered that the terms of imprisonment be wholly suspended indefinitely. The wife did not participate in the appeal. By way of background, the matter was instituted in the Federal Circuit Court for the purpose of property settlement proceedings between the husband and the wife. In June 2014 the primary judge made orders restraining the husband from disposing of a prestige motor vehicle without the written consent of the wife, or pursuant to an order of the court. In December

2014 the husband informed the wife’s solicitors that the car had been sold for $90,000 cash. JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY The husband also informed the wife’s solicitors he had spent the cash gambling and on drugs. In an affidavit the husband stated he sold the car to a Mr P, that Mr P had possession of the car and that he did not know Mr P’s or the car’s location. On 19 December 2014 the primary judge made two orders providing for the husband to either provide the wife’s solicitors with Mr P’s full contact details or that the husband deliver possession of the car to the wife’s solicitors by 22 December 2014. The husband did not comply with either order. It is the husband’s non-compliance with those two orders which led to the findings of contempt by the primary judge in August 2015 and the imposition of the sentences, the severity of which was ultimately challenged before the Full Court. The husband raised two challenges to the severity of his sentences on appeal. The first related to the fact that the sentences were to be served consecutively and the second challenge was directed at the indefinite suspension of the sentence of imprisonment. By his first challenge, the husband argued that the primary judge gave insufficient weight to his poor physical and mental health. He argued that had sufficient weight been given to those factors, the sentences should have been imposed concurrently rather than consecutively. The Full Court found no error in the primary judge’s decision to impose the sentences consecutively saying, “[i]ndeed, given the gravity of the contempt we have little doubt that a total sentence of imprisonment not longer than three months would have been insufficient.” In its consideration of this challenge the Full Court confirmed what was said by a previous Full Court in Abduramanaoski & Abduramanaoska (2005) FLC 93-215 where it was held that Part XIIIB of the Act is a complete code for dealing with contempt and sentencing under the Act and that “s 112AP affords a sentencing judge a wide discretion, which is to be exercised transparently and in light of the individual facts and circumstances of the case”.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 91 5

By his second challenge, the husband argued that the indefinite suspension of the terms of imprisonment would mean that the sentences would, prima facie, continue for the rest of his life and were therefore excessive. In considering this complaint the Full Court adopted what was said by the Full Court of the Federal Court in Hughes v Australian Competition & Consumer Commission [2004] FCAFC 319. In that case the Full Court of the Federal Court, applying similar principles to those contained in s 112AP, said: 56. ... We are, however, firmly of the view that it is rarely, if ever, that an order should be made suspending the whole or part of a term of imprisonment for an indefinite period. There must come a time when a person who is the subject of a conditional suspension of a term of imprisonment is no longer exposed to that sanction. Even the suspended committal orders referred to in the English authorities appear to have contemplated that the committal order lie in the Registry for a time after which the contemnor would not be exposed to the risk of committal. (emphasis added) The Full Court therefore found that the primary judge had erred in suspending the sentences imposed on the husband indefinitely. In reaching this conclusion, the Full Court noted that nothing they said:

SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY JUDGMENTS SIGNIFICANT AND NOTEWORTHY 24. … brings into question the appropriateness of a coercive sentence of indefinite duration designed to compel a person to do something in the future when there is a reasonable prospect it will be done. The Full Court re-exercised the discretion and re-sentenced the husband. Having found no error in the imposition by the primary judge of consecutive terms of imprisonment, the Full Court did not interfere with that aspect of the sentences. In accordance with its finding of error in relation to the indefinite suspension, the Full Court wholly suspended the terms of imprisonment until 31 December 2018 subject to certain conditions, including compliance with all future undertakings and court orders.

92 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA IN FOCUS

Peer Support Network

The Peer Support Network consists of nine staff members who are trained to provide immediate assistance should a staff member experience a distressing situation or difficult event. The program is designed to complement the existing Employee Assistance Program and allows support to be available immediately should an incident occur. Many people in the courts deal with difficult scenarios throughout the day and sometimes it affects them more than at other times. Being able to quickly debrief with a peer, by phone or in person, about a distressing situation is most important. Peer support officers from any location can provide assistance (there is no restriction on only accessing officers from the home registry or work group). All peer support officers attend a two day training course arranged through Lifeline called the Accidental Counsellor. This course focuses on the importance of communication and resilience in the workplace, and specifically how to communicate with people experiencing crisis within a court context. The training provides a solid foundation for crisis intervention, mental health awareness, suicide awareness, self-care and stress management.

MANAGEMENT AND OVERVIEWACCOUNTABILITY OF THE COURT

62 6

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

This section reports on aspects of the Family Court of Australia’s corporate governance arrangements. The Chief Justice, assisted by the Chief Executive Officer, is responsible for managing the administrative affairs of the Court. Under the Constitution, judicial power is vested in judges who administer that power in courts. The Family Law Act defines the Court as being a Chief Justice, a Deputy Chief Justice and the judges appointed to that court. By delegation from the Chief Justice,

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT case management judges assist in administering judicial functions in particular areas, such as case management. The Family Court is autonomously governed; that is, the judiciary has the responsibility for the administration of the Court. To enable the effective and efficient administration of justice, the judiciary needs support to deal with its workload. Non-judicial court employees, public servants accountable to the executive government through the Chief Executive Officer, provide that support. The Chief Executive Officer’s powers are broad, although subject to directions from the Chief Justice. The Chief Executive Officer holds the responsibilities and powers of an entity head under Commonwealth financial management and public service legislation. The judges’ committee structure facilitates collegiate involvement of the judges of the Court. Figure 6.1 shows the organisational structure of the Court.

96 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Figure 6.1 Organisational structure of the Family Court of Australia, 30 June 2016

Chief Justice Deputy Chief Justice Hon Diana Bryant AO Hon John Faulks

Judges

Executive Officer Chief Executive Officer Legal Counsel Leisha Lister Richard Foster PSM Neil Wareham

Principal Principal Executive Executive AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Registrar Child Director Director Dispute Client Corporate Services Services Angela Jane Vacant Adrian Filippello Reynolds Brocklehurst (Acting)

Chief Information Marshal and Judgment Child Dispute Registrars Registries Finance Officer Communications Security Publication Services Services Paul Stace (Acting)

Statistics Management Applications Accounting

Human Information Resources Management

REGISTRIES Property Infrastructure Adelaide, Albury, Alice Springs, Brisbane, Cairns, Canberra, Coffs Harbour, Dandenong, Darwin, Dubbo, Hobart, Launceston, Lismore, Melbourne, Newcastle, Parramatta, Rockhampton, Procurement Sydney, Townsville, Wollongong and Risk Management

Denotes professional responsibility

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 97 6

JUDICIAL OFFICERS OF THE FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA

At 30 June 2016, there were 35 judges of the Court, including the Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice.

Chief Justice

The Chief Justice is responsible for ensuring the effective, orderly and expeditious discharge of the business of the Court (s 21B Family Law Act) and for managing its administrative affairs (s 38A). The Chief Justice is assisted in judicial responsibilities by the Deputy Chief Justice (s 21B) and in administrative responsibilities by the Chief Executive Officer (s 38B). The Chief Justice’s chambers are located in

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT the Melbourne registry. Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO was appointed Chief Justice The Honourable Chief of the Family Court of Australia on 5 July 2004. She had Justice Diana Bryant AO previously been the inaugural Chief Federal Magistrate overseeing the establishment of the then Federal Magistrates Court, a position she held for four years.

Deputy Chief Justice

The Deputy Chief Justice assists the Chief Justice in the judicial administration of the Family Court. Particular responsibilities include case management, complaints about judges, the collection and strategic assessment of statistics, pastoral care and oversight of the Court’s committees. In the absence of the Chief Justice, the Deputy Chief Justice performs and exercises the powers of the Chief Justice (s 24). The Deputy Chief Justice’s chambers are located in the Canberra registry. The Honourable Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks was appointed as a Family Court judge on 12 October 1994. He was appointed as Deputy Chief Justice on 25 June 2004.

98 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

JUDGES ASSIGNED TO THE APPEAL DIVISION

Appointed to the Appeal Division The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO 5 July 2004 The Honourable Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks 25 June 2004 The Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine Finn 10 August 1993 The Honourable Justice Michelle May 6 February 2003 The Honourable Justice Stephen Ernest Thackray (Chief Judge Family Court of Western Australia) 16 November 2006 The Honourable Justice Steven Andrew Strickland 14 December 2009 The Honourable Justice Ann Margaret Ainslie-Wallace 9 July 2010 The Honourable Justice Judith Maureen Ryan 27 September 2012

The Honourable Justice Peter John Murphy 27 September 2012 AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT The Honourable Justice Murray Robert Aldridge 12 March 2015 The Honourable Justice Michael Patrick Kent 10 December 2015

JUDGES

Adelaide

The Honourable Justice Steven Andrew Strickland 22 November 1999 The Honourable Justice Christine Elizabeth Dawe 3 March 1997 The Honourable Justice David Michael Berman 18 July 2013

Brisbane

The Honourable Justice Michelle May 5 September 1995 The Honourable Justice Peter John Murphy 11 October 2007 The Honourable Justice Colin James Forrest 1 February 2011 The Honourable Justice Michael Patrick Kent 12 July 2011 The Honourable Justice Jenny Deyell Hogan 14 January 2013 The Honourable Justice Catherine Carew 7 March 2016

Canberra

The Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine Finn 2 July 1990 The Honourable Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks 25 June 2004 The Honourable Justice Shane Leslie Gill 16 May 2016

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 99 6

Hobart

The Honourable Justice Robert James Charles Benjamin AM 19 August 2005

Melbourne

The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO 5 July 2004 The Honourable Justice Victoria Jane Bennett 30 November 2005 The Honourable Justice Paul Joseph Cronin 20 December 2006 The Honourable Justice Kirsty Marion Macmillan 14 December 2011 The Honourable Justice Jennifer Ann Coate 31 January 2013 The Honourable Justice Sharon Louise Johns 29 July 2013 The Honourable Justice Christine Thornton 12 August 2013

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Newcastle

The Honourable Justice Stewart Craig Austin 13 July 2009 The Honourable Justice Margaret Ann Cleary 8 July 2010

Parramatta

The Honourable Justice Garry Frederick Foster 8 August 2013 The Honourable Justice Hilary Rae Hannam 13 August 2013

Sydney

The Honourable Justice Ann Margaret Ainslie-Wallace 9 July 2010 The Honourable Justice Judith Maureen Ryan 31 July 2006 The Honourable Justice Murray Robert Aldridge 13 December 2012 The Honourable Justice Janine Patricia Hazelwood Stevenson 18 May 2001 The Honourable Justice Mark Frederick Le Poer Trench 10 October 2001 The Honourable Justice Garry Allan Watts 14 April 2005 The Honourable Justice William Philip Johnston 12 July 2010 The Honourable Justice Ian James Loughnan 12 July 2010 The Honourable Justice Judith Anne Rees 15 December 2011 The Honourable Justice Robert Bruce McClelland 16 June 2015

Townsville

The Honourable Justice Peter William Tree 14 January 2013

100 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Family Court of Western Australia

(The following judges of the Family Court of Western Australia also hold Commissions in the Family Court of Australia) Date of Family Court commission Chief Judge The Honourable Justice Stephen Ernest Thackray 1 December 2004 The Honourable Justice Simon Moncrieff 31 August 2009 The Honourable Justice John Myer Walters 6 December 2012 The Honourable Justice Susan Janet Duncanson 6 December 2012 The Honourable Justice Richard O’Brien 12 April 2016

Administrative Appeals Tribunal

The Honourable Justice Janine Stevenson MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT The Honourable Justice Victoria Bennett The Honourable Justice Colin Forrest The Honourable Justice David Berman The Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine Finn The Honourable Justice Christine Elizabeth Dawe The Honourable Justice Robert James Charles Benjamin AM

APPOINTMENTS, RETIREMENTS AND RESIGNATIONS

Judicial officer appointments

The Honourable Justice The Honourable Justice The Honourable Justice Catherine Carew Shane Gill Richard O’Brien

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 101 6

Justice Catherine Carew: The Honourable Justice Catherine Carew was appointed to the Court’s Brisbane registry on 7 March 2016. Justice Shane Gill: The Honourable Justice Shane Gill was appointed to the Court’s Canberra registry on 16 May 2016. Justice Richard O’Brien: The Honourable Justice Richard O’Brien was appointed to the Family Court of Western Australia on 8 March 2016.

Appointment to the Appeal Division

Justice Michael Kent was assigned to the Appeal Division of the Family Court with effect from 10 December 2015. There were no retirements or resignations.

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT SENIOR EXECUTIVES

Chief Executive Officer

Richard Foster PSM FAIM The Chief Executive Officer is appointed to assist the Chief Justice to administer the Court. The Chief Executive Officer’s powers are broad (s 38D Family Law Act 1975), although subject to directions from the Chief Justice (s 38D(3)). The Chief Executive Officer holds the responsibilities and powers of an entity head under Commonwealth financial management and public service legislation, but is appointed under similar terms as judicial officers. The Chief Executive Officer is supported by the staff of the National Support Office. Richard Foster was appointed Chief Executive Officer in May 2000 and retires on 30 June 2016.

Principal Registrar

Angela Filippello The Principal Registrar provides high level legal and procedural advice to support the judicial functioning of the Family Court. As a senior lawyer, she discharges the statutory duties assigned to that position by the Family Law Act 1975, works closely with the Chief Justice and judges in administering the Act and related legislation, and identifies areas in need of reform. The Principal Registrar presides in court and holds the delegated power to make orders in interim parenting cases, maintenance cases and some enforcement of financial obligations. The Principal Registrar also oversees the performance of, and provides direction to, the Court’s registrars. Angela Filippello was appointed Principal Registrar in July 1999 and retires on 30 June 2016.

102 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Principal, Child Dispute Services

Jane Reynolds (acting) The Principal, Child Dispute Services advises the Chief Justice and the Chief Executive Officer on the provision of quality child dispute services to the Court. The Principal ensures that the services delivered by the family consultants are effective and consistent with the strategic and business objectives of the Court. The Principal also has responsibility for the development of strategic external relationships that promote and position the child dispute services of the Court within the family law framework. Jane Reynolds was appointed acting Principal, Child Dispute Services in February 2015.

Chief Information Officer MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Paul Stace (acting) The Chief Information Officer provides strategic vision, leadership and management of the Court’s applications, information management and infrastructure services. Paul Stace was appointed acting Chief Information Officer in February 2015.

Executive Director, Corporate

Adrian Brocklehurst The Executive Director, Corporate provides strategic leadership and management of the Court’s human resources, property and contracts, finance, management accounting and procurement and risk management. Adrian Brocklehurst was appointed Executive Director, Corporate in September 2014. Adrian holds a Bachelor of Commerce (Accounting) degree from the University of Newcastle and is a Fellow of CPA Australia.

Executive Director, Client Services

Vacant The Executive Director, Client Services is responsible for the delivery of client services in all family law registries. The Executive Director ensures that high quality registry services and support are provided to all judicial officers, litigants and legal practitioners, consistent with the strategic and business objectives of the Court.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 103 6

JUDICIAL COMMITTEES REPORTING

Chief Justice Bryant maintains a collegiate style of governance, and the judicial officers of the Court meet annually, or more often if required, in plenary. In addition, judges participate in a number of committees that develop policies across a range of matters. As part of the implementation of the International Framework for Court Excellence, and following consultations with the judges of the Court, the Chief Justice introduced five new standing committees in 2014. These committees facilitate a more inclusive, analytical and transparent discussion of important policy issues faced by the Court and result ultimately in a more integrated and accountable decision-making process.

Chief Justice Family Court of Australia

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Deputy Chief Justice Family Court of Australia

Chief Justice Court Policy Committee

Chief Justice, Administrative Judge for Appeals, Chairs of Standing Committees (5) and Chief Executive (exofficio)

Finance Rules Court Court Professional Law Reform Performance Services Development and Legislation and Judicial Welfare

Berman J Ryan J Austin J Forrest J Ainslie-Wallace J Strickland J

• Budgeting Rees J • Case • Cultural • Professional • Judicial (from February Management Diversity development Remuneration 2016) • Magellan • Aboriginal and programs including • Audit and • IT (case Torres Strait orientation Risk mangement Islanders system, • Unrepresented • Judicial eFiling and Litigants welfare eCourt) • Property • Research • National Management and Ethics Calendar • Library • Family Violence • Children’s Committee • IT Judicial Requirements

104 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Court Policy Committee

At the strategic level, this committee is the peak policy making body within the Court. The committee’s role is to support the Chief Justice in the administration of the Court and to provide strategic advice and policy direction, particularly in relation to legislative, procedural and administrative changes likely to affect the Family Court and its users. The committee comprises: >> The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO (Chair) >> The Honourable Deputy Chief Justice John Faulks >> The Honourable Justice Michelle May >> The Honourable Justice Ann Ainslie-Wallace >> The Honourable Justice Judith Ryan >> The Honourable Justice Stewart Austin MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> The Honourable Justice Colin Forrest >> The Honourable Justice David Berman >> Chief Executive Officer Richard Foster PSM (exofficio), and >> Leisha Lister (secretariat).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 105 6

JUDICIAL COMMITTEE HIGHLIGHTS

This section summarises the work of some of the judicial committees during 2015–16.

Finance

The Finance Committee’s principal focus is directed to the following: >> consider and define the full cost and budgetary requirements of the Family Court >> consider spending and budgetary priorities that affect core judicial work >> discuss budgetary priorities and the allocation of financial resources >> consider the budgetary requirements of the Court following the changes to the administration of the Family Court pursuant to the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, and >> ensure transparency in respect of expenditure and the setting of budgetary priorities MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT that affect core judicial work.

During 2015–16 members of the Finance Committee were Justice Berman (Chair), Justice Watts and Justice Austin. The committee met in person, by audio visual conferencing and by telephone. The committee was significantly assisted in its deliberations by the attendance from time to time of Chief Justice Bryant and Executive Director, Corporate, Adrian Brocklehurst.

106 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Rules

The Rules Committee is established in contemplation of section 123 of the Family Law Act 1975 (Cth), which provides that a majority of judges may make rules of court in relation to practices and procedures to be followed in the Family Court. The Rules Committee meets on a regular basis to consider proposed changes to the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth) with a view to improving the efficiency, accessibility and cost effectiveness of the Family Court for its clients. The committee also undertakes detailed consideration of discrete issues as required. During 2015–16, the committee met in person in August 2015 and February 2016, and otherwise by video-conference. Justice Ryan continued to chair the Rules Committee until February 2016 and, upon her resignation as Chair, Justice Rees was appointed to the position. Committee members during the year were Justice Loughnan, Justice Berman, Justice Hogan (until February 2016), Justice Ryan (from February 2016) Magistrate Moroni, Senior Registrar FitzGibbon, Registrar Paxton and Neil Wareham (legal counsel to the Family Court).

In 2015–16, the committee worked on a number of important projects, including amendments AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT to the Family Law Rules 2004 (Cth). These amendments were secured by the Family Law (Arbitration and Other Measures) Rules 2015 which, other than in relation to Arbitration, commenced on 1 January 2016. The Arbitration Rules came into effect on 1 April 2016. The amending rules increased the scale of costs by three per cent in conformity with the increase approved nationally by all superior courts and: >> facilitated effective and timely arbitration by making provision for subpoena and in relation to disclosure >> streamlined the process in relation to the administrative release of documents produced under subpoena >> introduced a chapter in relation to applications concerning children born by a surrogacy arrangement >> required any variation to a family violence order be filed >> identified when proceedings may be heard in chambers and to provide for judgments to be pronounced in open court and for written reasons for judgment to be published in open court >> introduced the concept of entry of orders and to clarify the circumstances in which a judgment or order may be varied or set aside, and >> various other matters of a technical nature.

The committee consulted with the Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia and with other constituent bodies about the proposed rule amendments.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 107 6

Court performance

The Court Performance Committee remains chaired by Justice Austin and its membership comprises all registry Case Management and Magellan judges. This year, the work of the committee has been concentrated on refinement of the Court’s trial case management and extension of the National Calendar project.

Case management The principles devised in 2015 to guide the operation of the Court’s ‘trial docket’ system of case management have been implemented in all registries, enhancing consistency across the Court in the way it manages its case-flow. The system envisages that only those cases which cannot be consensually resolved by intervention of registrars are allocated to judicial dockets for procedural management by judges to final trial.

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Magellan The Magellan protocol is a discrete case management pathway designed to ensure that cases involving allegations of sexual abuse or serious physical abuse of children are heard within six months of such allegations being raised in the litigation before the Court. Some refinements were made to the way in which cases qualify for classification within the protocol, and these changes were explained in the 2014–15 Annual Report. Those refinements have resulted in a more manageable number of cases. Presently, the number of pending Magellan cases fluctuates at around 180. Regrettably, a fair proportion of the Magellan cases cannot be heard within the model timeframe. The lack of adequate resources for the Court is one reason for the delay, but there are others beyond the Court’s control. For example, the parties often encounter difficulty obtaining expert evidence reports in a timely way (due to the paucity of forensic experts and the expense of their reports) and some litigants want to preserve their privilege against self-incrimination when they are involved in parallel criminal prosecutions. Nonetheless, Magellan cases are still accorded priority and the aims of the protocol are generally being met.

National calendar The Court’s national services should ideally be delivered as uniformly as circumstances allow. With that goal in mind, the Court operates a National Calendar under which trial judges are moved between registries to try and balance the case-flows in different registries. Even though resources do not permit complete equivalence in all registries, the National Calendar significantly reduces disparity. During 2015–16, trial judges spent a total of 62 weeks sitting away in other registries with greater need for judicial time.

108 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Professional development and judicial welfare

The aim of the Professional Development and Judicial Welfare Committee is to develop, implement and oversee judicial education in the Court by formulating a comprehensive plan for ongoing and extensive judicial education and to provide advice to the Chief Justice on judicial education and welfare issues. The committee implemented a two-day education program for judges. It is recognised that judges will have access to other programs developed by providers outside the Court such as those conducted by the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration and the National Judicial College of Australia. The committee also assists the Chief Justice in the dissemination of information as her Honour considers should be brought to the attention of the judges. Topics and issues covered in 2015–16 include: >> S 128 of the Evidence Act and certificates >> oppression suits MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> resilience, wellbeing and sustainable performance >> the appointment of liquidators and receivers >> judicial recusal >> traps for the uninitiated and how judges can assist experts making reports in how they frame the requests >> the secret life of documents >> vicarious trauma and judging, and >> laws of armed conflict.

The committee also develops education programs and puts in place mechanisms to support judges to maintain resilience and to provide orientation for new appointments. Key activities for 2015–16 include: >> including general resilience information in judicial education programs (e.g. maintaining psychological and physical health of the judiciary) >> providing mentoring for judges >> introducing a new national health assessment scheme for judges that provides annual medical health checks as a further commitment to health and wellbeing >> ensuring that judges are aware of the support services available to them to assist in dealing with matters of concern and that the services can be accessed directly by the judges so as to maintain both anonymity and confidentiality, and >> providing orientation sessions aimed at addressing aspects of the judicial role and practical matters peculiar to the Family Court.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 109 6

Court services

The Court Services portfolio is responsible for overseeing and reporting to the Court Policy Committee on governance and policy considerations pertaining to: >> the Court’s provision of services to the public, including the provision of services through the built environment in the form of court buildings and courtrooms and through electronic media, but also in terms of the equitable delivery of access to justice, mindful of barriers created by the cost of litigation, race, religious, cultural and language diversity, and physical and mental health disabilities >> the Court’s provision of services to its judges and staff, including by way of the development and/or provision of appropriate information and other technology, as well as adequate training and ongoing support in its use, and >> the Court’s maintenance and storage of its records.

In doing so, it also oversees the work of the following sub-committees:

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> Children’s Committee >> Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee, and >> Unrepresented Litigants Working Group.

Court Services also oversees matters that were previously dealt with by the Cultural Diversity sub-committee and the Property Management sub-committee. Justice Murphy of the Appeal Division was nominated by the Chief Justice during 2015–16 to oversee judicial information technology requirements.

Work of the sub-committees

Children’s The Children’s Committee was established in 2012 to consider what (if any) further work needs to be undertaken with respect to the involvement of children in parenting cases and how the family law courts might ascertain whether children feel their voices have been heard in proceedings that involve them. In 2015, the committee commenced planning of the second National Independent Children’s Lawyers’ Conference, to be held in Melbourne in October 2016. The conference program is now in place and it will build on the successful foundation provided by the first conference convened by the committee in Sydney in 2014. The conference is designed to facilitate the exchange of best practice ideas and information between independent children’s lawyers from all over Australia. Due to issues around the sourcing of funding and the emergence of another significant research project to be undertaken by the Australian Institute of Family Studies, the research project with Yourtown – Kids’ Help Line and Sydney University academics, that tapped into the thousands of children and young people who contact Kids’ Help Line each week in order to anonymously ascertain their views about their experiences of family breakdown,

110 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6 has been scaled down. A newly designed project that aims to identify specific concerns children talk about during and after being involved in family law matters, and to determine who they want to talk to and how, why and what they hope to gain support about, is being supported by the committee. The committee was involved in the development of age-appropriate, child-focused content for the children’s section on the courts’ websites and in producing fact sheets for distribution to children who come into contact with the courts. The landing pages on the courts’ upgraded websites are now available to children who visit these sites. These pages are designed to help children understand what is involved in their parents’ family law proceedings and what to expect if they are required to see a family consultant. The committee, through one of its members, has also been directly involved in a Pathways South Australia pilot of a Children’s Advisory Board based on the UK model of such a board.

Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander outreach The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander (ATSI) Committee seeks to continue the long history of the Court in promoting and improving access to justice for Indigenous families, by ensuring AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT the Court’s administration and judiciary work hand-in-hand to enable and facilitate the participation of Indigenous Australians in the Court’s processes. Committee Chair, Justice Benjamin, met with a large number of leaders of NSW Indigenous communities in October 2015 to discuss issues arising from the Attorney-General’s brief to the Family Law Council to report on the intersection of family law and child protection law. Justice Benjamin also attended a ‘Back to Country’ weekend with Victorian judges held in the Gippsland region of Victoria in November 2015. The committee continues to work on the following activities: >> converting the Court’s Indigenous Action Plan 2014–16 into a Reconciliation Action Plan >> developing a court protocol for Acknowledgment of Country at court events >> examining the potential of a resource of information relevant to ATSI outreach issues to be placed on the courts’ intranets >> establishing and building links with local Indigenous leaders around each of the Court’s registries, and >> working cooperatively with the Family Court of Western Australia, Federal Circuit Court, state courts and tribunals, the National Judicial College and relevant state judicial education authorities such as the Judicial Commission of NSW.

Unrepresented litigants The Unrepresented Litigants Working Group is chaired by Justice Le Poer Trench and consists of representatives from the Federal Circuit Court, the courts’ administration, family consultants, the NSW Bar Association, the NSW Law Society, community legal centres and others. The group has worked on simplifying documents and processes around contravention applications and has produced some draft simplified forms for consideration by the judges.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 111 6

Cultural diversity Justice Berman continues to represent the Court on the national Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, established by the national Council of Chief Justices. Over the last year, that council has had a full agenda working on: >> an interpreting and translating project >> research on coverings (clothing) in court settings >> a draft framework for access to justice for Indigenous and migrant woman >> the preparation of a Reconciliation Action Plan toolkit, and >> the preparation of an online training tool for judicial staff.

Property management Relevant developments include the major refurbishment of the Child Dispute Services area in the Sydney registry, reconfiguring the entire floor, including a new reception area and waiting MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT room, a state of the art child care facility which includes a teenage retreat, painting area, separated secure bathroom area for the children to use, two new secure rooms with their own unisex bathroom facility, new staff bathrooms and two new observation rooms. The project was undertaken by Department of Finance and handed over to the courts’ property section in May 2016, with the area returning to business as usual soon thereafter. The Adelaide registry was issued funding from the Department of Finance to redesign the child care room and interview rooms located in the Child Dispute Services area. A final design was approved in conjunction with Child Dispute Services staff. Tender documents went out in June 2016, with an expected construction commencement date of August 2016. At the Newcastle registry, a major project to replace the entire building’s air conditioning has been undertaken. Other improvements contracted around a major lease incentive include repainting four levels, carpet replacement on the ground floor, additional shelving throughout current storerooms, and some offices to help cope with decreased storage capacity throughout the building. A new public lift has also been installed in the Dandenong registry.

Judicial information technology requirements In 2015, the Court commissioned Fujitsu to undertake a comprehensive review of the Court’s technology requirements. That report, completed and submitted to the Chief Justice and the Chief Executive Officer early this year, examined in detail all aspects of the Court’s functions, from the front counter to judges’ chambers and to the publication and dissemination of judgments. The report included a comprehensive set of specifications across the totality of the Court’s requirements and made recommendations as to items that are essential and those which are less so. Consistent with Fujitsu’s brief, the report is written in technical language and on the Chief Justice’s appointment, Justice Murphy liaised with the head of the Fujitsu team for a document to be produced that could be more readily understood by the judges. The changes in management of the courts’ corporate services has resulted in that project being put on hold for the moment, but plans for a pilot scheme for the Appeal Division to introduce complete electronic systems is still in consideration.

112 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Family violence The Family Violence Committee is a joint committee of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. The committee’s principal responsibility is to provide advice to the Chief Justice, the Chief Judge and the Chief Executive Officer of both courts on the issue of family violence. In discharging this responsibility, the committee reviews and updates the courts’ family violence strategy and Family Violence Best Practice Principles, as well as undertaking discrete projects. During 2015–16, members of the Family Violence Committee were Justice Ryan (Chair), Justice Stevenson, Justice Hannam, Judge Brown, Judge Hughes, Judge Altobelli, Angela Filippello (Principal Registrar, Family Court of Australia), Leisha Lister (Executive Officer), and Di Lojszczyk (family consultant). The committee’s major project was the continued implementation of the Family Violence Plan 2014–16 which forms part of the commitment both courts have made to addressing family violence, including the measures contained in the joint Family Violence Best Practice Principles. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT The Family Violence Committee also worked on issues raised by: >> the report from the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence >> Senate Finance and Public Administration Committee Inquiry into Domestic Violence, and >> internal review processes on the death of a child or party.

COLLABORATIVE COMMITTEES

Joint Costs Advisory Committee

The Joint Costs Advisory Committee comprises representatives of the four federal courts: the High Court of Australia, the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. During the reporting period the committee comprised: >> Judge of the Family Court of Australia (Justice Benjamin) (Chair) >> Chief Executive Officer and Principal Registrar of the High Court of Australia (Andrew Phelan) >> Deputy Registrar of the Federal Court of Australia (John Mathieson) >> Principal Registrar of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Adele Byrne), and >> Principal Registrar of the Family Court of Australia, (Angela Filippello) (who participates as an observer).

The committee reviews and recommends variations to the quantum of costs contained in the rules made by federal courts and advises on other matters relating to those costs as may be referred to it by a federal court.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 113 6

SENIOR MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES

The senior executive of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court continued to meet annually to establish the strategic direction and priorities for the effective administration of both courts. Senior executives of both courts participate in a number of committees that provide high level operational and policy advice to the Chief Executive Officer, Richard Foster.

Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group

The Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group (CMAG) provides operational and policy advice on key areas that affect the administration of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court. Chaired by the Chief Executive Officer, CMAG meets bi-monthly and comprises: >> Executive Director, Operations, Federal Circuit Court (Steve Agnew) >> Executive Director, Corporate (Adrian Brocklehurst) MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> Executive Officer, Family Court (Leisha Lister) >> Principal Registrar, Family Court (Angela Filippello) >> Principal Registrar, Federal Circuit Court (Adele Byrne) >> Principal, Child Dispute Services (Jane Reynolds [acting]) >> Director of Administration, Federal Circuit Court (Stewart Fenwick) >> Director, Human Resources (Claire Golding) >> Chief Information Officer (Paul Stace [acting]), and >> Regional Registry Managers.

Other committees

A number of administrative committees were also active during 2015–16 and provided high level operational and policy advice. Meeting on a regular or ad hoc basis, they included: >> Audit and Risk >> National Consultative, and >> Work Health and Safety.

Senior management committee highlights

This section highlights the work of senior management committees during 2015–16. Appendix eight has details of membership and the terms of reference for the various committees.

Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group In 2015–16, CMAG continued to provide advice to the Chief Executive Officer on new policy and other initiatives. These included:

114 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

>> continued work with the Attorney-General’s Department on the review of the federal courts >> implementation of the International Framework for Court Excellence, Family Violence Screening Tool Pilot, Multicultural Plan and cultural competency training >> financial and human resource planning >> staff compliance training and development >> information technology initiatives, and >> human resource management policies and practices.

Audit and Risk Committee The Audit and Risk Committee is established in accordance with section 45 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act). The Chief Executive Officer must establish and maintain an audit committee for the entity, with the functions and responsibilities required by PGPA Rule Section 17. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT The functions must include reviewing the appropriateness of the courts’ financial reporting, performance reporting, system of risk oversight and management and system of internal control. The committee comprises an external chair and two senior managers from the Court’s administration. During 2015–16, the committee considered a range of issues, including the internal audit plan, strategic risk and fraud risk treatments and business continuity. It also provided oversight of the Australian National Audit Office and internal audit report recommendations.

National Consultative Committee The National Consultative Committee is a key forum through which the Court consults with staff about broader issues that have a national perspective. Elected staff delegates actively present the views of staff regarding issues that impact nationally on staff and the management and future direction of the Court. The committee met twice in 2015–16. Its areas of focus continued to be: >> the objectives of the Court and how these might be achieved >> financial and human resource planning >> information technology initiatives >> security >> management and review processes, including proposed changes >> work health and safety matters >> equal employment opportunity issues >> accommodation and amenities, and >> human resource management policies and practices.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 115 6

National Work Health and Safety Committee The National Work Health and Safety Committee met once during the year to discuss and resolve national work health safety issues in addition to: >> developing and reviewing health and safety management arrangements, policies and practices >> consulting with staff on health and safety issues >> developing and refining processes to regularly audit health and safety in the Court’s registries, including eliminating identifiable hazards and mitigating known risks >> reviewing any workplace incidents or accidents to develop prevention strategies >> making recommendations on the work health and safety impact of changes in the workplace, and >> discussing and resolving work health and safety issues in the Court. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT CORPORATE AND OPERATIONAL PLANNING AND ASSOCIATED PERFORMANCE REPORTING AND REVIEW

At 30 June 2016, there were 753 ongoing and non-ongoing entity employees (excluding judicial officers, the Chief Executive Officer and casual employees) in all states and territories except Western Australia. Guidance for staff is contained in the following documents, available to all staff on the Court’s intranet and website: >> administration policies and procedural documents including MARCH 2016 guidelines, procedures and manuals from the finance, COURTS EXCHANGE human resources and information, communication and technology areas >> APS Values and Code of Conduct >> Corporate Plan and business area plans >> HR information bulletins >> Service Charter and Service Commitments >> Registry Services Delivery Strategy

Courts Exchange >> Statement of Strategic Intent, and >> case management policies and manuals related to the management of family law cases from the Chief Justice, the Principal Registrar and the Principal, Child Dispute Services.

116 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

The Court’s geographically dispersed judiciary and staff are informed of significant changes and events through the following: >> Chief Justice eMessages—emails from the Chief Justice to the judiciary and all staff >> Chief Executive Officer eMessages—emails from the Chief Executive Officer to all staff >> Chief Executive Instructions—the official mechanism by which the Chief Executive Officer communicates and directs the Court’s compliance with the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 (Cth) >> Client service advices—from the Executive Director, Client Services to all client service staff working in the registries >> Courts Exchange—the courts’ internal staff newsletter, which is issued four times per year and includes columns from the Chief Justice, Chief Judge and Chief Executive Officer. This is the primary vehicle for sharing information and celebrating the achievements and successes of court staff, and

>> intranet messages—latest news. AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

INTERNAL AUDIT

The Court has, as part of its corporate governance arrangements, appropriate mechanisms to manage general business risk as well as fraud risk. In 2015–16, the Court’s internal audit services were provided by RSM Bird Cameron and monitored by the Audit and Risk Committee. The 2015–16 Internal Audit Plan was developed taking into account the risk drivers in the Strategic Risk Management Plan and after consultation with the Audit and Risk Committee and the senior management team. Internal audits conducted during the year included: >> Fraud Control Plan >> Strategic Risk Management Plan >> Rehabilitation Management System and Framework, and >> Contract Management.

The Court’s Audit and Risk Committee monitored the implementation of individual audit report recommendations generated from those audits, through quarterly status reports.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 117 6

RISK MANAGEMENT

The Court promotes a culture that supports the identification, analysis, assessment, treatment, monitoring and review of all strategic, operational, compliance and financial risks. This is supported by the Court’s Risk Control and Compliance Framework. The Risk Control and Compliance Framework provide policies, procedures and tools to promote effective risk management. The framework is available to all court staff on the intranet for the principal purpose of achieving better services and outcomes for clients, judicial services and staff. The Court continued to participate in the annual Comcover benchmarking survey, which measures risk and assesses the extent of cultural change within agencies. The Court’s overall result continued to improve, reflecting the Court’s efforts in the area of risk management. The Court continues to further revise its Business Continuity Plans with regular reviews, testing and updating of the plan being undertaken. The Procurement and Risk Management section continues to provide, as a standing agenda

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT item, regular updates on risk related activities to the Audit and Risk Committee. Business continuity desktop scenarios were conducted at Hobart (including Launceston), Townsville (including Rockhampton) and Dandenong (including Melbourne) registries in October 2015.

FINANCIAL RISK

The Court manages financial risk in accordance with the Risk Control and Compliance Framework. The relevant mechanisms are: >> risk assessments for annual business plans >> risk assessments for identified projects >> Accountable Authority Instructions available to all staff on the intranet, and >> monthly financial reports to CMAG and oversight by the Audit and Risk Committee.

FRAUD PREVENTION AND CONTROL

The Court’s Fraud Control Plan 2016–17 complies with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2011. The Court has in place fraud investigation, reporting and data collection procedures that met the needs of the Court and comply with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2011.

118 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

During 2015–16, the Audit and Risk Committee continued to receive reports on the implementation status of fraud risk treatments. The Court continued to monitor the Fraud Control Plan 2015–16, which is available to all court staff via the intranet. The plan was developed in consultation with key stakeholders across all areas of court activities. No incidents of fraud were noted within the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court during 2015–16.

Fraud control certification

In accordance with the Commonwealth Fraud Control Framework 2014, issued by the Minister for Justice, pursuant to Section 10 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Rule 2014, I hereby certify that I am satisfied that: >> the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has prepared fraud assessments and has in place a fraud control plan that complies with the Guidelines MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> appropriate fraud prevention, detection, investigation and reporting procedures and processes are in place, and >> annual fraud data has been collected and reported that complies with the Guidelines.

WG Soden Principal Registrar and Chief Executive Officer Federal Court of Australia

INFORMATION PUBLICATION SCHEME

Entities subject to the Freedom of Information Act 1982 (FOI Act) are required to publish information to the public as part of the Information Publication Scheme (IPS). This requirement is in Part II of the FOI Act and has replaced the former requirement to publish a section 8 statement in an annual report. An entity plan showing what information is published in accordance with the IPS requirements is accessible from entity websites. Information about FOI and the IPS entity plan for the Family Court can be found via a link on the homepage of the Family Court’s website at www.familycourt.gov.au The Court received three Freedom of Information requests during 2015–16. At 30 June 2016, there were no matters outstanding before the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 119 6

ETHICAL STANDARDS

The Australian Public Service Values and Code of Conduct contained in the Public Service Act 1999 apply to all employees of the Court. In 2015–16, the Court maintained ongoing information and education activities to ensure that all staff are aware of their rights, responsibilities and obligations in relation to privacy, ethics and other factors such as environmental responsibility, data management and data quality. The Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court maintain web-based Service Charter and Service Commitments publications. These outline the services clients may expect of the courts. The Court is committed to supporting employees to adhere to the APS Values and to comply with the Code of Conduct. Employees receive information about the Values and the Code through all-staff emails, the intranet and induction and other training programs. Employees also receive information and guidance about conduct and behaviour expectations from their managers.

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Policy and practices on the establishment and maintenance of appropriate ethical standards – Ethics Contact Officers

Established in May 2009, the Australian Public Service Commission’s Ethics Contact Officer Network (ECONET) plays a key role in supporting the ongoing work of the Ethics Advisory Service. The service has responsibility for promoting the Government’s ethical agenda, which is focused on enhancing ethics and accountability in the Commonwealth public sector. The Director, Human Resources and the Workforce and Policy Manager are the Court’s representatives at the ECONET forum.

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013 came into effect on 15 January 2014. The Act promotes integrity and accountability in the Australian public sector by encouraging the disclosure of information about suspected wrongdoing, protecting people who make disclosures and requiring agencies to take action. A Public Interest Disclosure is, essentially, a disclosure made by a current or former public official of suspected wrongdoing in the Commonwealth public sector. The courts are committed to complying with all applicable laws and with best practice. Corrupt practices, breaches of the law and other conduct that is disclosable under the Act are contrary to our values. If they occur, reporting them is encouraged so that they may be addressed properly. With that in mind, the courts established formal procedures under the Act, the Public Interest Disclosure Rules and the Public Interest Disclosure Standards. These procedures are published on the courts’ intranets and websites. Authorised officers appointed by the Chief Executive Officer for the courts are the Executive Director, Client Services, Regional Registry Manager Sydney, and Director, Human Resources.

120 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

SERVICE CHARTER AND SERVICE COMMITMENTS

Service Charter Our service commitments

for the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia

This document outlines the service you can expect from the administrative staff of the Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. It does not relate to the work that is performed by judges.

More information can be found in the Courts’ Service Charter, available under the publications section of the website: www.familylawcourts.gov.au

The Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia are independent courts but cooperate to provide streamlined access to the federal family law system. The Federal Circuit Court also deals with general federal law matters.

What you can expect from our staff Our staff will: n Be courteous, helpful and respectful to your individual needs. n Respect your rights whether you have legal representation or not and treat all parties fairly. n Give you prompt and responsive service. n Respect your privacy (unless there are legal requirements to disclose information). n Deliver services for parties and lawyers in a safe and secure environment. n Provide information about the interests of the children in parenting matters, conciliation in property and financial disputes and where appropriate, refer you to community-based support services. n Provide accurate up-to-date information that is clear and understandable. n Assist, where possible, to overcome any personal barriers to a person’s dealings with the courts – such as distance, physical, hearing or visual difficulties, or non-English speaking background.

Service Charter Service Commitments

The aim of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court is to give clients and other users AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT of the courts the best services they possibly can. What the courts mean by this is set out in the joint Service Charter and Service Commitments publications. The Court also has a Portfolio Budget Statement Key Performance Indicator specifically about complaints. This, along with the Service Charter, is a central part of the Court’s service monitoring and response mechanism. The Service Charter outlines the service level standards clients can expect from staff of the courts and how clients and other users of court services may make suggestions or complaints about services, policy, practice or procedures. An aspect of the Charter, in terms of community expectations of the courts, is that it makes clear what court staff cannot do. This is important because frequently clients or prospective clients have expectations that the courts cannot meet. The context is that for many clients, the family courts are the only courts they will ever have anything to do with—so the processes, procedures and legal environment are completely unfamiliar and this unfamiliarity occurs at what may be one of the most stressful times of their lives because of the breakdown of family relationships. The courts appreciate this, however, must work impartially and professionally: thus the information about what people can expect but also what staff cannot do. For example, staff cannot give legal advice or tell people what words to use in their court papers or what to say in court; they cannot tell someone whether or not they should bring their case to court. Staff cannot recommend a certain lawyer to act on a client’s behalf or interpret, change or enforce orders made by a judge or other judicial officer. The Service Charter and Service Commitments publications (which summarise information about what clients of the courts can expect from client services staff, what the staff cannot do, clients rights and responsibilities and how clients can help the courts to help them) are available on www.familycourt.gov.au

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 121 6

FEEDBACK AND SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS

Feedback helps to drive service improvement and the Court invites feedback, including suggestions and complaints about administrative things such as the standard of client service received in a registry, a privacy matter, a security matter, a court policy, or the way correspondence has been handled. Full details about feedback and complaints is contained in Part three—Report on Court Performance—but in summary, in 2015–16, the Court received: >> 55 complaints about administrative matters. These are complaints relating to family law registries which service both the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court, and include complaints about court administrative procedures and processes, staff personal conduct, privacy, security and the client feedback process >> 40 complaints about judicial delays >> 41 about judicial conduct, and

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> 30 compliments.

COMPLIANCE REPORTING

There were no significant issues reported under paragraph 19(1)(e) of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 that relates to non-compliance with the finance law in relation to the entity.

EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL SCRUTINY

External scrutiny

Reports by the Auditor-General The Auditor-General made no report specific to the Family Court during 2015–16.

Administrative Appeals Tribunal There were no relevant proceedings in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.

Commonwealth Ombudsman The Commonwealth Ombudsman made no report specific to the Family Court during 2015–16.

Action in defamation There were no actions in defamation during 2015–16.

Freedom of Information The Court received three Freedom of Information requests during 2015–16.

122 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6 MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

Whole-of-government Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) initiatives

During 2015–16, the courts participated in a number of whole-of-government ICT initiatives: >> In October 2015 the annual ICT benchmarking report for the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court was submitted to the Department of Finance. The report covered all ICT operating and capital expenditure for the 2014–15 financial year and included some quantitative measures about staffing and quantities of ICT equipment. >> Whole-of-government supply contracts are mandatory across a broad number of areas. By 30 June 2016, the courts were using the: −− Microsoft volume sourcing arrangement −− desktop hardware panel −− telecommunications commodities carriage and associated services panel −− major office machines panel −− data centre panel −− internet based network connection services panel, and −− Government internet gateway services.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 123 6

>> ICT staff from the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court are members of the GovMail and GovDesk Inter-Agency Working Group. The Department of Finance is conducting this project to confirm demand for email (GovMail) and/or desktop productivity tools (GovDesk) to be delivered via the cloud, in anticipation of a subsequent approach to market to establish an initial product offering. The working group is a key advisory body for the project, considering issues and opportunities relating to GovMail and GovDesk services, and providing advice and perspectives on strategic aspects of the project. >> As part of the Web Accessibility National Transition Strategy, the courts are required to update online government information and services to meet the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0 standard for website accessibility. The courts’ websites www.familycourt.gov.au and www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au are Double A compliant.

Senate estimates committee hearings

Senior Executive Service staff of the Court attend Senate estimates committee hearings to answer questions about the Court’s activities. In 2015–16, 28 questions on notice MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT were received and answered by the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. In addition, there were more than 50 departmental responses.

EXTERNAL EVALUATIONS

Ernst & Young review of courts' funding

The Department undertook work with Ernst & Young in 2014–15 to develop costing scenarios to support options for consideration by government as part of the 2015–16 Budget process. Following consideration of the Ernst & Young review, the Australian Government announced, as part of the 2015–16 Budget, that the corporate functions of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court would be merged with those of the Federal Court of Australia to form a single administrative body with a single appropriation under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 from 1 July 2016.

INTERNAL EVALUATIONS

There were no internal evaluations during 2015–16.

124 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

Overview

The Human Resources section of the Corporate Services division supports all areas of the Court by managing a range of human resources, entitlements processing services, and advice to the Court’s judiciary and staff. In 2015–16 Human Resources focussed on: >> preparation for the courts’ Corporate Services Amalgamation Project >> enterprise agreement negotiations >> recruitment services: advertising support, recruitment tips and assistance, probation, letters of offer and contracts >> payroll, entitlements and conditions of employment

>> payroll system, including support for Aurion/employee self-service reporting AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> workforce capability services including planning, Performance Management and Development Scheme, learning and development and workplace wellbeing >> workplace relations support including enterprise agreement, National Consultative Committee, policy and legislation advice >> implementing systems to support workplace health and safety legislation, and >> promoting employee wellbeing and respectful behaviours.

Courts’ Corporate Services Amalgamation Project

In May 2015, the Government announced that it would implement reforms under which the corporate functions of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court would be merged with that of the Federal Court of Australia to form a single administrative body with a single appropriation under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, to take effect from 1 July 2016. Senior Corporate Services staff participated in a steering committee and a coordinating project working group to advance the project. Following passage of the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act 2016 in March 2016, project work intensified significantly.

Enterprise Agreement

The Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014 has a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2014, however it continued to operate during 2015–16, and will continue in existence until it is replaced or otherwise terminated. The Enterprise Agreement covers all non-SES staff of the courts and delivered salary increases of three per cent for each of the three years 2011–12, 2012–13 and 2013–14. Salary increases under the Agreement are now exhausted. Accordingly, the terms and conditions of the enterprise agreement carry over (with no further pay rises, unless and until, there is a new negotiation under revised budgetary conditions).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 125 6

The enterprise agreement directly supports the Court’s strategic objectives and complements its performance planning, management arrangements and improvements at the team and individual level. The Court is committed to supporting employees to adhere to the APS Values and comply with the Code of Conduct. During 2015–16, employees continued to receive information about the Values and the Code through all-staff emails, the intranet, and induction and other training programs. Employees also received information and guidance about conduct and behaviour expectations from their managers.

WORKFORCE PLANNING, RETENTION AND TURNOVER

Workforce planning

At 30 June 2016, 22.71 per cent* of court staff were eligible to retire. Accordingly, the Court MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT continued to develop appropriate human resource strategies to ensure future capability and resourcing and to cope with staff turnover. These included promoting a clearer understanding of the capacity and capability of the Court’s workforce and developing a risk management strategy that strengthens succession management for critical roles and leadership positions in the Court. The strategies were communicated to managers and staff, helping to ensure that succession plans were developed at local levels. * As a percentage of staff numbers, excluding the judiciary and casuals

Retention strategies

Strategies to support the wellbeing of staff and to encourage staff retention are integral to the Court’s commitment to workplace diversity. The strategies include the following options, benefits and initiatives.

Balancing work and personal life The Court recognises the need to balance the operational needs of the Court and the personal lives of staff. Its employment arrangements provide for general and individual flexible working arrangements, including flex time, time off in lieu, part-time work, working from home opportunities, purchased leave, maternity, adoption, fostering and supporting partner’s leave, salary sacrifice arrangements and paid time off work over Christmas and New Year.

A safe and healthy work environment The Court provides a family-friendly and non-discriminatory work environment with strong policies against harassment and bullying. The Court and its employees are committed to measures that will assist with preventing and managing illness and injury, psychological injuries and assisting absent staff return to work as soon as reasonably practical. Other healthy work environment strategies include an employee assistance program that provides free professional counselling to employees and members of their immediate families, and free annual influenza vaccinations.

126 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Workplace diversity The Court recognises that diversity among its staff is one of its greatest assets. Valuing the distinctive characteristics in every employee and drawing on the diversity of our backgrounds, skills, talents and views to enhance the Court’s working environment and the work of the Court, underpins the current workplace diversity plan.

Rewards and recognition

Recognition of staff in the form of positive feedback and celebration of achievement is an important part of the Court’s culture and business practice. The Court’s reward and recognition schemes recognise and reward employees for the achievement of corporate goals, providing non-cash incentives.

Australia Day achievement medallions The Australia Day achievement medallions are awarded to a select group of Australian citizens

each year. The awards recognise excellence in contribution by employees working in both AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT government and non-government organisations, including the courts. The Court’s 2016 Australia Day Awards recognise the significant contribution and outstanding service provided by employees to the Court. This year’s winners were:

Roland Andronicos, Sydney registry Roland has been with the courts for almost eight years as a systems support officer. Roland successfully delivered excellent customer service between Sydney and Parramatta registries, attending to any IT issues (small or large). In addition, Roland found time to attend rural registries across NSW assisting with IT work, which he continues to do. Throughout his time with the courts, Roland has built a strong and reputable rapport with staff at all levels. His strong work ethic and dedication to the job extends further, with Roland being involved with project management work at his home registries, as well as nationwide for such projects as PC, SOE and printer replacements.

Antonia Dunne, Hobart registry Antonia has been with the courts for almost 13 years as a senior family consultant. Antonia does a significant amount of clinical work and is determined to bring about the best possible outcomes for children and families. Antonia has a strong work ethic, performs at a very high level and is an inspiring role model. Antonia embraces challenges, acting as Regional Coordinator Victoria/Tasmania for several months in 2006 and her skills and support were of great assistance. In addition to her normal workload, Antonia provides assistance to others in various ways such as her involvement with a number of committees and national projects; giving presentations at external conferences; as a member of the Psychology Board of Australia; and in chairing the courts’ state-wide Family Violence Consultative Committee for nine years.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 127 6

Michelle Cooley, Launceston registry Michelle has been with the courts for almost 16 years as an operations manager. Michelle has overseen many changes to the physical appearance of the offices, and she has managed other building issues such as a month long shut down of the lift. Michelle has managed the work diaries and appointments for new family consultants over many years, and she has been a major influence on their work lives, and made long-term friendships as a result.

Andrew Bryant, Sydney registry Andrew has been with the courts for almost 13 years as a client service officer. Andrew has earned the title of ‘Number One Helper’ at the Sydney registry. He goes out of his way to help individuals and his peers in Records, has a great personality, and is sorely missed when he takes his annual leave in January. Andrew takes his job very seriously and is the pride of the courts and the Jobsupport vocational training officer who touches base with him every four weeks. Andrew always smiles while doing an excellent job and has also been asked to pull the files for the divorce list and for judges. He is very careful in executing these tasks The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO presents Roland Andronicos with his Australia Day award

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT and loves his work and the people he works with.

Rupal Patel, National Enquiry Centre Rupal has been with the courts for almost nine years as a client service team leader. Rupal has always worked above and beyond her core duties and is prepared to help solve any issues that come up in the day-to-day running of the courts’ business. She is an integral part of the National Enquiry Centre (NEC) and a fountain of knowledge which she is happy to share with anybody who requires help. She is passionately involved in training NEC staff and conducts regular meetings with new registry and chambers staff as part of their induction, with a focus on consistent practices and streamlining of procedures court-wide. She is always one step ahead of any changes to procedure and legislation, ensuring staff are ready to deal with information for litigants and lawyers. Antonia Dunne (holding her Australia Day certificate) Michelle Cooley recieves her Australia Day award with staff members from Hobart registry from the Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO Christine Tuff, National Support Office Christine has been with the courts for four years as the webmaster. During 2015 Christine delivered not one, but two new websites for the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, along with decommissioning the Family Law Courts website, working tirelessly to coordinate the rewrite and redistribution of the family law content it housed into the two new sites. Since launching in May 2015, the websites have greatly improved the delivery of vital information to court users. The development of the “How do I...” pages and their ease of navigation has greatly assisted unrepresented litigants navigate the court processes. The pages have also improved the way the NEC delivers information to clients via phone or Live Chat. Christine always goes above and beyond, regularly working outside of core hours to ensure daily court lists and critical content is available in a timely fashion and that technical issues are analysed and resolved directly or escalated to the appropriate person in the infrastructure team. She is committed to ensuring the websites deliver top quality services for court users and staff.

From left: The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO, Andrew Bryant and Chief Judge John Pascoe AC CVO

128 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

and loves his work and the people he works with. AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

From left: The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO, Andrew Bryant and Chief Judge John Pascoe AC CVO

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 129 6

Years of service awards Years of service awards are presented to employees who have been in court administration for more than 20, 25, 30 and 35 years. Recipients in 2015–16 follow:

20 years >> Verity Brown – Registrar, Adelaide >> Julie Egan – Team Leader Registry Services, Parramatta >> Christina Herbst – Associate, Townsville >> David William Hugall – Regional Coordinator, Child Dispute Services, Brisbane >> Elizabeth Mary Ritchie – Client Service Officer, Melbourne >> Cheryl Sanderson – Client Service Officer, Hobart

25 years MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> Leslye Dunn – Case Coordinator, Newcastle >> Elizabeth Hore – Associate, Melbourne >> Ronald Jarrett – Business Systems Development Officer, Brisbane

30 years Rupal Patel receives her Australia Day award from the Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO >> John FitzGibbon – Senior Registrar, Melbourne >> Lynette Chin – Associate, Melbourne >> Kenneth Kimmorley – Registrar, Parramatta

35 years >> Ronald Bowles – Client Service Officer, Melbourne

The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO and Christine Tuff

130 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Years of service awards Years of service awards are presented to employees who have been in court administration for more than 20, 25, 30 and 35 years. Recipients in 2015–16 follow:

35 years >> Ronald Bowles – Client Service Officer, Melbourne

The Honourable Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO and Christine Tuff

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 131 6

WORKFORCE TURNOVER

During 2015–16, 100 employees left the Court. Of these, 33 were non-ongoing and 67 were ongoing employees, representing an annual turnover rate of 13.28 per cent against total staff numbers (753) at 30 June 2016. For further information see Table 8.10 at Appendix three. This compares with ongoing staff separations of 11.1 per cent in 2014–15, 11.5 cent in 2013–14, 10.1 per cent in 2012–13 and eight per cent in 2011–12.

Staffing profile

At 30 June 2016, the Court had 753 employees covered by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014, common law contracts or Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs), but excluding judicial officers, the Chief Executive Officer and casual employees. This was a 2.5 per cent decrease compared with 772 employees at 30 June 2015. Appendix three provides a breakdown of staff by location, gender, attendance, ongoing and non-ongoing employment status. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

Judicial officers

At 30 June 2016, the Court had 35 judges, including the Chief Justice (17 female and 18 male). For further information see Table 8.9 at Appendix three which shows the number of judges by location. The remuneration arrangements for all judicial officers and the Chief Executive Officer are governed by enforceable determinations of the Remuneration Tribunal. Further details including relevant determinations are available at: www.remtribunal.gov.au

Indigenous employment

At 30 June 2016, the Court had seven employees who identified as Indigenous (seven female); 0.9 per cent of total employee numbers. The Australian Public Service Commissioner wrote to the Chief Executive Officer seeking support to improve the representation of Indigenous employees in the Commonwealth public sector.

132 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

AGREEMENT MAKING

A single enterprise agreement for the courts

As mentioned previously, the courts’ Enterprise Agreement came into effect on 1 July 2011, and although it has passed its nominal expiry date of 30 June 2014, under present arrangements, it will continue to operate until it is replaced or otherwise terminated.

Other agreements Offers of AWAs to court employees ceased from 13 February 2008, in accordance with government policy; however at 30 June 2016, 12 employees had enforceable AWAs in place. Table 8.12 at Appendix three, sets out the AWA minimum and maximum salary ranges by classification. In some limited cases, the Court has used common law contracts or individual flexibility arrangements to provide supplementary conditions of employment for individuals covered by the Enterprise Agreement and determinations made by the Entity Head under

section 24 of the Public Service Act 1999, to build upon existing AWA arrangements. AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT At 30 June 2016, eight employees had employment arrangements governed by enforceable common law contracts and three had employment arrangements governed by determination 24 instruments. See Table 8.11 at Appendix three for more detail.

Relationship between agreements Terms and conditions of employment in the Court are governed by one or more of the following industrial instruments: >> the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014, covering all non-SES employees except those on AWAs >> AWAs >> individual determinations under s 24(1) of the Public Service Act 1999, or >> individual common law contracts.

The Enterprise Agreement is a comprehensive agreement, however for some employees, it may be supported by either an individual flexibility agreement, a s 24(1) determination or a common law contract that provides additional terms and conditions (for example, as a way of retaining high-value employees). AWAs may also be supported by individual s 24(1) determinations or common law contracts to provide for pay increases or additional terms and conditions, including non-salary benefits.

Senior Executive Service remuneration

Terms and conditions for the Court’s Senior Executive Service (SES) employees are in common law contracts, AWAs and individuals 24(1) determinations made by the Chief Executive Officer. SES salaries are benchmarked against other public sector agencies and take account of the Court’s budgetary position and the Government’s workplace bargaining policy.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 133 6

Non-salary benefits

Non-salary benefits provided by the Court to employees include: >> motor vehicles >> car parking >> superannuation >> access to salary sacrificing arrangements >> computers, including home-based computer access >> membership of professional associations >> mobile phones >> studies assistance >> leave flexibilities MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT >> workplace responsibility allowances (for example, first aid, fire warden, community language), and >> airline club memberships.

Performance pay arrangements

During 2015–16, the Court neither entered into any performance pay arrangements nor paid performance pay to any employee.

TRAINING, LEARNING AND DEVELOPMENT

There have been a number of training initiatives run throughout the year. These include:

Family consultant training

Seminar series Child Dispute Services (CDS) continued to run a monthly seminar series for family consultants, judges and family lawyers. The program was enhanced over 2015–16 by: including topics specifically identified by family consultants; ensuring a better balance of presenters in terms of academics and practitioners; and including a greater emphasis on internal knowledge. Topics covered included drug screening procedures, surrogacy and assisted reproductive technology, online parenting skills programs, family violence, childhood trauma, and post-separation interventions for high-conflict families.

134 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Clinical induction program The Clinical Induction Program requires all newly commencing family consultants to undertake six months of meetings, research and presentations. It is designed to ensure that all clinicians within CDS are familiar with the scholarly literature in key areas relevant to their work. This program continued in 2015–16, with a total of 10 new clinicians joining CDS.

Further evolution of the core knowledge database The Core Knowledge Database is an extensive collection of book chapters and journal articles that are deemed to be salient to the work of court clinicians. In addition to the amendments in 2015 allowing papers to be rated by users (thus, serving as an additional filtering mechanism) this year saw the inclusion of several full text eBooks. This allowed a flexible alternative for family consultants to access comprehensive written material on key areas.

Conference presentations and attendance In 2015–16 there was an increased focus on family consultants representing the courts at external forums and conferences. Some examples include gatherings of the Australasian AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Institute of Judicial Administration, the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, and various other conferences focussing on family violence, trauma, and parent-child attachment.

Representation/publications There were several publications outlining the work undertaken by family consultants during 2015–16, including papers in Every Child Magazine and InPSYCH. The purpose of this was to provide some general information to the wider community about the role, functions and mandate of court clinicians undertaking family assessments. In addition to more formal approaches, two videos were published on the courts’ websites, designed to inform children about the process of seeing a family consultant (see page 80 for more information).

National conference In June 2016, CDS held a national conference for family consultants, the first occasion in over eight years that such an event has been convened. Topics included family violence, parental alienation, parent-child observations, child interviewing and cross examination.

Family violence screening One of the most significant projects of the year has been the piloting of a new approach to family violence screening by family consultants at s11F events. A new tool was developed and tested at Brisbane and Melbourne, with extremely positive results. The intention is to embark on a national implementation of this tool in 2016–17, which will involve all parents attending an s11F interview with a family consultant to complete a series of questions about their experience to family violence.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 135 6

eLearning modules In an effort to cater to all learning styles, the first of a series of clinical eLearning modules was developed in early 2016. This module, focussing on family violence, provides a continuing professional development opportunity for family consultants to undertake at their own pace, in their own time. The content is tailored to their specific work with the courts.

Continuing professional development framework for clinicians To promote professional development and accountability for high quality practice and learning, a unified Continuing Professional Development (CPD) framework for all internal family consultants has been developed. This framework requires clinical staff to develop a CPD plan at the start of the financial year, identifying learning needs and actions to address these needs over the coming year. Thereafter, they will be required to accrue a minimum number of CPD points (roughly aligned with the amount of hours they have spent training in a given area) to demonstrate that they have successfully met and benefited from CPD expectations. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Registrar training

Registrars participated in a national in-house conference which focused on developing legal skills and knowledge. The program included segments on family violence, as well as on areas of professional development. The speakers included judges, the Chief Executive Officer of Domestic Violence NSW, Women’s Legal Service, a researcher from the Australian Institute of Family Studies and a senior forensic accountant. Preliminary work has commenced on the development of an online eLearning package for registrars on family violence in accordance with the courts’ Family Violence Plan.

Client service and chambers training

Training in registries and via video conference was undertaken throughout the year focussing on performance management, new supervisor training, emotional awareness and behaviours as well as some team building and coaching session.

DISABILITY REPORTING

Since 1994, Commonwealth departments and agencies have reported on their performance as policy adviser, purchaser, employer, regulator and provider under the Commonwealth Disability Strategy. In 2007–08, reporting on the employer role was transferred to the Australian Public Service Commission’s State of the Service Report and the APS Statistical Bulletin. These reports are available at www.apsc.gov.au From 2010–11, departments and agencies have no longer been required to report on these functions. The Commonwealth Disability Strategy has been overtaken by the National Disability Strategy 2010–2020, which sets out a ten year national policy framework to improve the lives of people with disability, promote participation and create a more inclusive society. See www.dss.gov.au

136 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Employee assistance program

The Family Court and its employees, through the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014, have a commitment to ensuring psychological and physical wellbeing. The Court’s Employee Assistance Program, provided by Converge International, is a free, confidential counselling service for all court employees and their immediate families who are experiencing personal or work-related problems. Converge also provide a dedicated Manager Assistance Program to confidentially discuss issues which may arise as a result of being in a supervisory position.

PRODUCTIVITY GAINS

The creation of a single entity in 2013, with all court staff working under a single Enterprise Agreement continued to produce efficiency savings for the courts through the more efficient MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT allocation of resources, elimination of duplicated services and the rationalisation of court services. Synergies were achieved in the area of training, where program delivery was made available to the staff of both courts, thus reducing cost and capturing a greater number of staff.

FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court is a non-corporate commonwealth entity under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.

Operating revenue and expenses

Total revenue for the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court in 2015–16 was $194.318 million, including appropriations from government ($152.502 million), other revenue ($1.781 million) and other gains ($40.035 million). Other Gains reflects notional revenue to pay for services received free of charge, comprised of Commonwealth Law Courts rent from the Department of Finance ($19.074 million), registry, migration and library services received from the Federal Court ($9.861 million), and liabilities assumed by related entities for the Judges’ Pension Scheme ($11.100 million). Operating expenditure for the 2015–16 financial year amounted to $206.113 million. Figure 6.2 provides a breakdown of the actual costs incurred by the courts for 2015–16. Of the total amount: 31 per cent is directly attributable to the Federal Circuit Court; 13 per cent is directly attributable to the first instance jurisdiction of the Family Court; and five per cent is directly attributable to the appellate jurisdiction of the Family Court. Depreciation and Amortisation, Asset Movements and Bad Debts, and property and other notional expenses not directly attributable to either jurisdiction comprise 20 per cent of the expenditure. The remaining 31 per cent of expenditure relates to services shared between the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court for registry and corporate services (Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration). A breakdown of the costs directly attributed to the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration is shown in Figure 6.3.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 137 6

Operating result

For 2015–16 the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has recorded a loss of $11.662 million after changes in asset revaluation and including Depreciation and Amortisation expenses.

Figure 6.2 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure ($206.113 million), 2015–16

Depreciation and Asset movement, amortisation, $9.595m (5%) $0.033m (0%) FCoA: appellate – Shared property employee and supplier expenses, $10.276m (5%) exp, $9.947m (5%)

FCoA: employee and supplier Property and library exp, $27.099m (13%) services provided free of charge, $20.678m (10%) MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

FC and FCC: admin – FCC: employee and supplier employee and supplier exp, $64.786m (31%) exp, $63.699m (31%)

Table 6.1 Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure

Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure

Family Court of Expenses directly incurred by the judiciary appointed as First Australia direct Instance judicial officers within the Family Court of Australia and expenditure includes judicial salary (and entitlements such as long leave and notional pension scheme contributions), judicial support staff costs (and employee entitlements, such as annual leave, long service leave and superannuation), travel costs (for circuits, judicial calendaring/relief), and court operation expenses (Regulation 7 Family Reports, court recording, transcription, interpreters).

Family Court of Expenses directly incurred by the judiciary assigned to the Australia appellate appellate jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia and include direct expenditure judicial salary (and entitlements such as long leave and notional pension scheme contributions), judicial support staff costs (and employee entitlements, such as annual leave, long service leave and superannuation), travel costs (for Full Court, judicial calendaring/relief) and court operation expenses (Regulation 7 Family Reports, court recording, transcription, interpreters).

138 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court expenditure

Federal Circuit Court Expenses directly incurred by the judiciary appointed to exercise of Australia direct federal and family law jurisdiction within the Federal Circuit expenditure Court of Australia and include judicial salary (and entitlements such as annual leave, long service leave, superannuation, and notional pension scheme contributions), judicial support staff costs (and employee entitlements, such as annual leave, long service leave and superannuation), travel costs (for circuits, judicial calendaring/relief), and court operation expenses (Regulation 7 Family Reports, court recording, transcription, interpreters). Includes registry and migration services provided free of charge in federal law matters to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia from the Federal Court of Australia.

Family Court and Employee and supplier expenses incurred by registry and Federal Circuit Court corporate services in supporting both the Family Court of MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT admin: employee and Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. Details shown supplier expenses in Figure 6.3.

Property and library Expenses which the courts recognise but do not require any services received appropriation revenue from government. Includes services free of charge provided free of charge from the Department of Finance for courtrooms and chambers within Commonwealth Law Courts and library services from the Federal Court, and audit services from the Australian National Audit Office.

Shared property Rent and property operating costs the courts incur for leased and expenses Commonwealth Law Court premises. These are property costs for which the Court received appropriation revenue funding.

Depreciation and Expenses which the courts recognise but do not require any amortisation appropriation revenue from government. Appropriation funding for depreciation and amortisation ceased 30 June 2010 with the move to ‘net cash’ funding and was replaced with a Departmental Capital Budget to fund the replacement of court assets.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 139 6

Figure 6.3 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure ($63.699 million), 2015–16

Registry services: Indigenous Family Liaison Officers, $0.042m (0%)

Registry services: administration, Corporate services, $6.286m (10%) $6.703m (11%)

Registry services: Family Consultants, Information technology $6.587m (10%) services, $7.056m (11%)

Registry services: Registrars, $3.734m (6%)

MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Corporate costs, $13.244m (21%) Registry services: Client services, $14.315m (22%) Principal, Child Dispute Services, $0.232 (0%) CEO and support, $5.500m (9%)

Table 6.2 Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure

Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure

Corporate services Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to finance, human resources, property services and contract services.

Information technology Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to the services provision of information technology services to the courts.

Corporate costs Corporate costs are the employee entitlements expenses (long service leave, annual leave, superannuation) incurred by the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court support staff, along with fringe benefit expenses incurred by the Court’s judiciary and SES for Fringe Benefit Tax liabilities for the provision of motor vehicles and other fringe benefits.

Principal, Child Dispute Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to the Services courts’ Principal, Child Dispute Services.

CEO and support Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to the Office of the Chief Executive Officer, Marshal (including all contracted guarding costs) and the Communications team.

140 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Categories of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Administration expenditure

Registry services— Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to client client service service staff providing front line support to both the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

Registry services— Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to registrar registrars staff providing front line support to both the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

Registry services— Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed family consultant to family consultant staff providing front line support to both the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

Registry services— Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to administration administration staff providing front line support to both the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT Registry services— Employee and supplier expenses directly attributed Indigenous Family to Indigenous Family Liaison Officers providing front Liaison Officers line support to both the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

Administered revenue

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court received $60.010 million on behalf of the Commonwealth for court fees and fines. Administered revenue is not available to offset the courts’ operating costs. Offsetting the administered revenue collected by the courts on behalf of the Commonwealth were refunds of fees ($0.243 million), and write down and impairment of assets for bad and doubtful debts ($0.800 million). The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court also receive an administered appropriation to source primary dispute resolution services such as counselling, mediation and conciliation from community-based organisations for litigants in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia. In 2015–16 the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court incurred $0.525 million for these primary dispute resolution services. This resulted in a total comprehensive income of $58.442 million which was returned to government.

Events after the reporting period

In accordance with a 2015–16 Budget decision by the Australian Government, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court will cease to operate as a government entity. Although the Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia will remain independent Chapter III courts under Australian Constitution, the Government entity under which they operated will be merged with that of the Federal Court of Australia from 1 July 2016.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 141 6

PURCHASING, CONSULTANTS AND CONTRACTS

The Court’s Procurement and Risk Management section assists staff undertaking procurement and manages a number of corporate contracts. The section also manages, or has significant involvement in, all complex procurement undertaken by the Court to ensure compliance with legislative obligations and the Commonwealth Procurement Rules. The Accountable Authority Instructions, the Commonwealth Procurement Rules and the Court’s Procurement Framework are all on the intranet as reference material for court staff. The core policies and principles of the Commonwealth Procurement Rules were, as far as practicable, adhered to throughout 2015–16. The Court’s Annual Procurement Plan was published meeting mandatory reporting requirements. An appropriate market approach was made for all procurements covered by the rules. All contracts let in 2015–16 had provision for the Auditor-General to access contractors’ premises.

Consultants MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT During 2015–16: >> two new consultancy contracts were entered into involving total actual expenditure of $73,700 (GST inclusive), and >> four ongoing consultancy contracts were active involving total actual expenditure of $351,121 (GST inclusive).

Total actual expenditure on consultancy contracts for 2015–16 was $424,821 (GST inclusive). The process of engagement of all consultants is required to adhere to the procedures described in the Court’s Procurement Framework and is categorised in accordance with the following: A—skills currently unavailable within the Court B—need for specialised or professional skills C—need for independent research or assessment. Depending on the particular needs, value and risks (as set out in the Court’s Procurement Framework) the Court uses open tender, prequalified tender and limited tender for its consultancies. The Court is a relatively small user of consultants. As such the Court has no specific policy by which consultants are engaged, other than within the broad frameworks above, related to skills unavailability within the Court or when there is need for specialised and/or independent research or assessment. Information on expenditure on all court contracts and consultancies is available on the AusTender website www.tenders.gov.au No contracts were let to an organisation for the delivery of services previously performed by the Court during the reporting period.

Exempt contracts

During the reporting period, no contracts or standing offers were exempt from publication on AusTender in terms of the Freedom of Information Act 1982.

142 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 6

Procurement initiatives to support small business

The Court supports small business participation in the Commonwealth Government procurement market. Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) and Small Enterprise participation statistics are available on the Department of Finance’s website at www.finance.gov.au/procurement/statistics-on-commonwealth-purchasing-contracts/ The Court recognises the importance of ensuring that SMEs are paid on time. The results of the Survey of Australian Government Payments to Small Business are available on the Treasury’s website at www.treasury.gov.au In doing so, the Court utilises some of the following initiatives or practices: >> the Commonwealth Contracting Suite for low-risk procurements valued under $200,000, and >> electronic systems or other processes used to facilitate on-time payment performance, including the use of payment cards. MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT ASSETS AND PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Asset management

The Family Court of Australia is located in shared Commonwealth owned facilities (Commonwealth Law Courts) in Adelaide, Brisbane, Canberra, Hobart, Melbourne, Parramatta and Sydney. The Court also occupies privately leased facilities in Albury, Cairns, Dandenong, Dubbo, Launceston, Lismore, Newcastle, Townsville and Wollongong, and shares the state court facility in Alice Springs, Coffs Harbour, Darwin and Rockhampton.

Projects

Melbourne An upgrade to the subpoena viewing room was completed in 2016. The project addressed the layout and functionality of the space. The new layout provides additional space to view subpoena documents and increases security within the area.

Cairns Works were completed in February 2016 to improve the acoustic performance of the level three interview rooms and the child dispute assessment area (a total four rooms). The outcome of the project reduces the risk of confidential conversations being overheard.

Townsville A reconfiguration of the witness box and bar table of courtroom one was completed in February 2016. The project provides additional distance from the witness box to the bar table which results in a less confrontational environment for witnesses.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 143

6 MANAGEMENT AND ACCOUNTABILITY MANAGEMENT

Melbourne registry

Newcastle The lessor undertook significant base building works in 2016, which resulted in improved services within the registry. In line with this work, a range of works was undertaken by the Court to improve the amenity of the registry. This included increasing the seating capacity in the public waiting areas, creating an improved subpoena viewing room, painting common areas and re-carpeting. The project also increased storage within the building which included the installation of additional compactus. The project has refreshed the registry and improved amenities for staff, litigants and lawyers.

Sydney The Court worked in collaboration with the Department of Finance, who funded the works, on a major project to improve the Child Dispute Services area of the Lionel Bowen Building. The fitout included refurbishing the reception area, childcare room, observation and meeting rooms. The works have resulted in a space that is welcoming for families and especially for children who are required to attend the Court building.

CORRECTION OF ERRORS IN 2014–15 REPORT

The Court has no matters to report.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 145 IN FOCUS

New Commonwealth Courts Portal video

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court have developed a second Commonwealth Courts Portal video to assist unrepresented litigants. The video, eFiling your family law matter in the Commonwealth Courts Portal, explains how to file documents and manage cases online through the Portal. Specifically, it provides instructions such as how to: >> register >> login >> start a new file >> link a file >> search for files, and >> access and print a proof of divorce.

These topics were identified as some of the most commonly asked questions during Live Chat. The courts are increasingly moving towards more electronic services, as seen with the 2016 announcement that divorce is moving online. eFiling has many benefits: there is no need to visit or queue at registries, filing fee payments are processed securely, 24/7 access to court files, less chance for errors in applications (step-by-step guide), option to select the most suitable court date and the option to receive email notifications and alerts about the status of matters. Using the Commonwealth Courts Portal also increases efficiency and assists in reducing the costs of litigation. The video is available on the Court’s YouTube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/ familycourtAU and on the Family Court website www.familycourt.gov.au FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

7 7

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

INDEX TO THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Certification 149 Statement of Comprehensive Income 152 Statement of Financial Position 153

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Statement of Changes in Equity 155 Cash Flow Statement 157 Administered Schedule of Comprehensive Income 159 Administered Schedule of Assets and Liabilities 160 Administered Reconciliation Schedule 161 Administered Cash Flow Statement 162 Overview 163 Notes to the financial statements 165 1. Financial Performance 165 1.1 Expenses 165 1.2 Own-Source Revenue and Gains 167 2. Income and Expenses Administered on Behalf of Government 169 2.1 Administered – Expenses 169 2.2 Administered – Income 169 3. Financial Position 170 3.1 Financial Assets 170 3.2 Non-Financial Assets 171 3.3 Payables 175 3.4 Interest Bearing Liabilities 175 3.5 Other Provisions 176 4. Assets and Liabilities Administered on Behalf of Government 177 4.1 Administered – Financial Assets 177 4.2 Administered – Payables 179 5. Funding 180 5.1 Appropriation 180 5.2 Special Accounts 183 5.3 Cash Flow Reconciliation 184 6. People and Relationships 186 6.1 Employee Provisions 186 6.2 Senior Management Personnel Remuneration 187 7. Managing Uncertainties 188 7.1 Contingent Liabilities and Assets 188 7.2 Financial Instruments 188 7.3 Administered – Financial Instruments 192 7.4 Fair Value Measurements 193 8. Other Information 195 8.1 Reporting of Outcomes 195

148 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 149 7 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

150 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 151 7

Statement of Comprehensive Income for the period ended 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000

NET COST OF SERVICES Expenses Employee Benefits 1.1A 119,710 119,321 119,158 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Suppliers 1.1B 76,580 75,551 75,838 Depreciation and amortisation 3.2A 9,595 10,603 9,963 Finance Costs 1.1C 195 214 105 Write-Down and Impairment of Assets 1.1D 2 13 - Losses from asset sales 31 54 - Total expenses 206,113 205,756 205,064

Own-Source Income Own-source revenue Sale of Goods and Rendering of Services 1.2A 1,092 1,274 990 Other Revenue 1.2B 689 789 485 Total own-source revenue 1,781 2,063 1,475

Gains Other Gains 1.2C 40,035 39,672 39,342 Total gains 40,035 39,672 39,342 Total own-source income 41,816 41,735 40,817 Net (cost of)/contribution by services (164,297) (164,021) (164,247)

Revenue from Government 152,502 148,683 151,784 Surplus/(Deficit) after income tax on continuing operations (11,795) (15,338) (12,463)

OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME Items not subject to subsequent reclassification to net cost of services Changes in asset revaluation surplus 133 - - Total other comprehensive income after income tax (11,662) (15,338) (12,463)

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes. Budget variances commentary was not included for the Statement of Comprehensive Income as the variances between budget and actual were not considered significant.

2 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

152 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Statement of Financial Position as at 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000

ASSETS Financial assets Cash and Cash Equivalents 3.1A 1,336 1,396 1,238 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Trade and Other Receivables 3.1B 12,856 17,683 12,669 Total financial assets 14,192 19,079 13,907

Non-financial assets Land and Buildings 3.2A 25,205 24,596 23,102 Property, Plant and Equipment 3.2A 9,344 11,464 12,416 Computer software 3.2A 5,809 5,905 5,564 Inventories 64 63 73 Other Non-Financial Assets 3.2B 1,917 1,955 1,844 Total non-financial assets 42,339 43,983 42,999 Total assets 56,531 63,062 56,906

LIABILITIES Payables Suppliers 3.3A 2,731 3,843 2,395 Other Payables 3.3B 3,717 2,992 2,412 Total payables 6,448 6,835 4,807

Interest bearing liabilities Leases 3.4A 2,879 3,271 3,321 Total interest bearing liabilities 2,879 3,271 3,321

Provisions Employee Provisions 6.1A 34,593 36,059 37,485 Other Provisions 3.5A 2,863 2,885 3,371 Total provisions 37,456 38,944 40,856

Total liabilities 46,783 49,050 48,984 Net assets 9,748 14,012 7,922

EQUITY Contributed equity 48,860 41,462 48,460 Reserves 22,997 22,864 22,864 Accumulated deficit (62,109) (50,314) (63,402) Total equity 9,748 14,012 7,922

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

3 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 153 7

Statement of Financial Position as at 30 June 2016

Budget Variances Commentary Statement of Financial Position Land and Buildings The original budget was prepared and submitted in April 2015, prior to closing balances being available, and was therefore a best forecast at the time. The variance was due to assets additions for the year was higher than budgeted amount. Property, Plant and Equipment The original budget was prepared and submitted in April 2015, prior to closing balances being available, and was therefore a FINANCIAL STATEMENTS best forecast at the time. The variance includes, not only movements in opening balances, but the changes in depreciation forecasts for the year. PPE opening balances were $1.515m lower than budgeted and depreciation for the year $0.342m higher. This together with asset purchases $1.215m lower than budgeted purchases has resulted in PPE showing a $3.072m variance. Suppliers payable The variance was primarily a result of the recognition of an operating lease incentive liability for Newcastle. Other Payables and Employee Provisions The variances were due to the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court corporate staff leave liabilities transferring to the Federal Court having been recognised as Other Payables which was not budgeted for. Finance leases The variance was due to 2015-16 principal repayments reducing liability by $391k which was not budgeted for. Other Provisions The variance was due to make good provision lease term and bond rate adjustments resulting in lower than anticipated make good provision.

4 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

154 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Statement of Changes in Equity for the period ended 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000 CONTRIBUTED EQUITY Opening balance Balance carried forward from previous period 41,462 33,562 41,462 Adjusted opening balance 41,462 33,562 41,462 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Comprehensive income Other comprehensive income - - - Total comprehensive income/(loss) - - Transactions with owners Contributions by owners Departmental capital budget 7,398 7,900 6,998 Total transactions with owners 7,398 7,900 6,998 Closing balance as at 30 June 48,860 41,462 48,460

RETAINED EARNINGS Opening balance Balance carried forward from previous period (50,314) (34,976) (50,939) Adjusted opening balance (50,314) (34,976) (50,939) Comprehensive income Surplus/(Deficit) for the period (11,795) (15,338) (12,463) Other comprehensive income - - - Total comprehensive income/(loss) (11,795) (15,338) (12,463) Closing balance as at 30 June (62,109) (50,314) (63,402)

ASSET REVALUATION RESERVE Opening balance Balance carried forward from previous period 22,864 22,864 22,864 Adjusted opening balance 22,864 22,864 22,864 Comprehensive income Other comprehensive income 133 - - Total comprehensive income/(loss) 133 - - Closing balance as at 30 June 22,997 22,864 22,864

TOTAL EQUITY Opening balance Balance carried forward from previous period 14,012 21,450 13,387 Adjusted opening balance 14,012 21,450 13,387 Comprehensive income Surplus/(Deficit) for the period (11,795) (15,338) (12,463) Other comprehensive income 133 - - Total comprehensive income/(loss) (11,662) (15,338) (12,463) Transactions with owners Contributions by owners Departmental capital budget 7,398 7,900 6,998 Total transactions with owners 7,398 7,900 6,998 Closing balance as at 30 June 9,748 14,012 7,922 The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

5 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 155 7

Statement of Changes in Equity for the period ended 30 June 2016

The budget variances commentary was not included for the Statement of Changes in Equity as the variances between budget and actual were not considered significant.

Accounting Policy Equity Injections Amounts appropriated which are designated as 'equity injections' for a year (less any formal reductions) and Departmental Capital Budgets (DCBs) are recognised directly in contributed equity in that year.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Restructuring of Administrative Arrangements Net assets received from or relinquished to another Government entity under a restructuring of administrative arrangements are adjusted at their book value directly against contributed equity.

6 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

156 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Cash Flow Statement for the period ended 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000

OPERATING ACTIVITIES Cash received Appropriations 160,113 155,514 154,185 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Sales of goods and rendering of services 2,222 2,744 990 Net GST received 4,116 5,193 4,867 Other 589 689 485 Total cash received 167,040 164,140 160,527

Cash used Employees 109,762 107,671 108,706 Suppliers 54,581 52,943 51,821 Cash used - other 83 86 - Section 74 receipts transferred to OPA 2,699 3,305 - Total cash used 167,125 164,005 160,527 Net cash from/(used by) operating activities 5.3A (85) 135 -

INVESTING ACTIVITIES Cash received Proceeds from sales of property, plant and equipment 24 22 - Total cash received 24 22 -

Cash used Purchase of property, plant and equipment 6,102 5,746 6,998 Purchase of intangibles 1,289 1,972 - Total cash used 7,391 7,718 6,998 Net cash from/(used by) investing activities (7,367) (7,696) (6,998)

FINANCING ACTIVITIES Cash received Contributed equity 7,783 8,124 6,998 Total cash received 7,783 8,124 6,998

Cash used Repayment of borrowings 391 405 - Total cash used 391 405 - Net Cash from/(used by) financing activities 7,392 7,719 6,998

Net increase (decrease) in cash held (60) 158 - Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the reporting period 1,396 1,238 1,238 Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the reporting period 3.1A 1,336 1,396 1,238

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

7 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 157 7

Cash Flow Statement for the period ended 30 June 2016

Budget Variances Commentary Statement of Cash Flow Statement Cash received - rendering of services The variance was due to unforeseen additional cash received and the recovery of costs for Chief Judge Pascoe's attendance at meetings of the Hague Experts Group in 2016. Net GST received Actual net GST received was lower than budgeted amount FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Cash received – appropriation and section 74 receipts transferred to OPA Cash received - appropriations was higher than budgeted amount as a result of section 74 receipts transferred to OPA was not budgeted for in the Original Budget Investing activities - cash used Budgeted investing cash used amount was not split between PPE & intangibles Financing activities – cash received The variance was due to increase spending against DCB from carried forward DCB from 2014-15 and updated DCB from additional estimate changes.

8 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

158 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Administered Schedule of Comprehensive Income for the period ended 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000 NET COST OF SERVICES Expenses Suppliers 2.1A 525 291 892 Write-down and impairment of assets 2.1B 800 382 -

Other expenses - refunds of fees 2.1C 243 270 300 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Total expenses 1,568 943 1,192

Income Revenue Non-taxation revenue Fees and fines 2.2A 60,010 58,120 71,575 Total non-taxation revenue 60,010 58,120 71,575 Total revenue 60,010 58,120 71,575 Total income 60,010 58,120 71,575 Net contribution by services 58,442 57,177 70,383 Total comprehensive income 58,442 57,177 70,383

The above schedule should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes

Budget Variances Commentary Administered Schedule of Comprehensive Income Fees and Fines The variance was due to the disallowance of proposed fee increases under which the original budget had been prepared. Suppliers The variance was due to the lower than expected amount of clients accessing mediation and conciliation services. Write-down and impairment of assets The variance from the prior year is as a result of an increased provision for doubtful debts. The Courts have not previously budgeted for write-down and impairment of assets due to uncertainty surrounding measurement of outstanding fees.

9 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 159 7

Administered Schedule of Assets and Liabilities as at 30 June 2016

Original 2016 2015 Budget Notes $'000 $'000 $'000 ASSETS Financial Assets Cash and cash equivalents 4.1A 166 583 203 Trade and other receivables 4.1B 7,025 1,318 736

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Total assets administered on behalf of Government 7,191 1,901 939

LIABILITIES Payables Suppliers 4.2A - 40 - Other payables 4.2B 453 - - Total liabilities administered on behalf of Government 453 40 -

Net assets/(liabilities) 6,738 1,861 939

The above schedule should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes

Budget Variances Commentary Administered Schedule of Assets and Liabilities Trade and trade receivables The variance was due to a change in banking arrangements whereas receipts were collected on behalf of the Courts by the Federal Court of Australia. Other payables The variance was not budgeted for and prior year information was not available.

10 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

160 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Administered Reconciliation Schedule for the period ended 30 June 2016

2016 2015 $'000 $'000

Opening assets less liabilities as at 1 July 1 861 939

Net contribution by services

Income 60 010 58 120 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Expenses Payments to entities other than corporate Commonwealth entities (1,568) ( 943) Transfers (to)/from the Australian Government Appropriation transfers from Official Public Account Annual Appropriation for administered expenses Payments to entities other than corporate Commonwealth entities 564 252 Special appropriations (unlimited) s77 PGPA Act Repayments Payments to entities other than corporate Commonwealth entities 255 285 GST increase to Appropriations s74 PGPA Act Payments to entities other than corporate Commonwealth entities 56 25 Appropriation transfers to OPA Transfers to OPA (54,440) (56,817) Closing assets less liabilities as at 30 June 6,738 1,861

The above schedule should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes

Accounting Policy Administered Cash Transfers to and from the Official Public Account Revenue collected by the entity for use by the Government rather than the entity is administered revenue. Collections are transferred to the Official Public Account (OPA) maintained by the Department of Finance. Conversely, cash is drawn from the OPA to make payments under Parliamentary appropriation on behalf of Government. These transfers to and from the OPA are adjustments to the administered cash held by the entity on behalf of the Government and reported as such in the schedule of administered cashflows and in the administered reconciliation schedule.

11 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 161 7

Administered Cash Flow Statement for the period ended 30 June 2016

2016 2015 Notes $'000 $'000

OPERATING ACTIVITIES Cash received Fees 53,837 57,107 Fines 139 67

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Net GST received 47 23 Total cash received 54,023 57,197

Cash used Suppliers 620 277 Refunds of fees 244 270 Other 11 15 Total cash used 875 562

Net cash from operating activities 53,148 56,635

Net increase in cash held 53,148 56,635

Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the reporting period 583 203 Cash from Official Public Account for: Appropriation Act 1 (2014-15) 564 252 GST Increase to Appropriations (s74A PGPA Act) 56 25 Special Appropriation - repayments (s 77 PGPA Act) 255 285 Total cash from official public account 875 562

Cash to Official Public Account for: Transfer to OPA (54,440) (56,817) Total cash to official public account (54,440) (56,817)

Cash and cash equivalents at the end of the reporting period 4.1A 166 583

The above statement should be read in conjunction with the accompanying notes.

12 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

162 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Overview

Objectives of the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court

The Family Court & Federal Circuit Court (the Courts) is an Australian Government controlled entity. It is a not-for-profit entity.

The objectives of the Family Court, as Australia’s superior court in family law, are to: a) determine cases with the most complex law, facts and parties; b) cover specialised areas in family law; and c) provide national coverage as the appellate Court in family law matters.

The objective of the Federal Circuit Court is to provide the Australian community with a simple and accessible forum for the resolution of less complex disputes within its jurisdiction. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The Courts are structured to meet the outcome of providing access to justice for litigants in family and federal law matters within the jurisdiction of the Courts through the provision of judicial and support services.

The corporate services functions of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court merged with the Federal Court to form a single administrative entity from 1 July 2016 pursuant to the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act 2016. This resulted in the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, in its current form, no longer existing from 1 July 2016. It is the government’s policy that its corporate services functions be merged into the Federal Court as a single administrative entity.

The Courts' activities contributing toward this outcome are classified as either departmental or administered. Departmental activities involve the use of assets, liabilities, income and expenses controlled or incurred by the Courts in its own right. Administered activities involve the management or oversight by the Courts, on behalf of the Government, of items controlled or incurred by the Government.

The Courts’ administered activities are to provide dispute resolution services such as counselling, mediation and conciliation from community-based organisations and are also related to fees charged for access to the Courts’ services. The Courts’ administered expenses relate to refunds of fees to clients.

The Basis of Preparation

As noted in the Objectives (ref to above para 5), Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, in its current form, ceased to exist from 30 June 2016. Its functions, assets, liabilities and commitments merged with the Federal Court to form a single administrative entity with effect from 1 July 2016. There has been no change in the structure or amounts of funding provided to the former Family Court and Federal Circuit Court and its functions are all continuing in the Federal Court. The financial statements have been prepared on this basis.

The financial statements are general purpose financial statements and are required by section 42 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.

The Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with: a) Public Governance, Performance and Accountability (Financial Reporting) Rule 2015 (FRR) for reporting periods ending on or after 1 July 2015; and b) Australian Accounting Standards and Interpretations issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) that apply for the reporting period.

The financial statements have been prepared on an accrual basis and in accordance with the historical cost convention, except for certain assets and liabilities at fair value. Except where stated, no allowance is made for the effect of changing prices on the results or the financial position. The financial statements are presented in Australian dollars and values are rounded to the nearest thousand dollars unless otherwise specified.

New Accounting Standards

Adoption of new Australian Accounting Standard Requirements No accounting standard has been adopted earlier than the application date as stated in the standard. Of the new standards, amendments to standards and interpretations issued prior to the sign-off date that are applicable to the current period, none have a material impact on the Courts.

Future Australian Accounting Standard Requirements The following new/revised accounting standards and interpretations were issued by the Australian Accounting Standards Board prior to the signing of the statement by the accountable authority and chief financial officer, which are expected to have a material impact on the Courts financial statements for future reporting periods.

13 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 163 7

AASB 124 Related Party Refer to AASB 2015-6 Amendments to Australian Accounting Standards – Disclosures - July 2015 Extending Related Party disclosures to include application by not-for-profit public (Principal) (effective date: 1 sector entities and includes implementation guidance for these entities. July 2016)

AASB 16 Leases (effective AASB 16 addresses this issue by bringing all leases onto the balance sheet of date: 1 January 2019) lessees, thereby increasing the transparency surrounding such arrangements and making the lessee’s balance sheet better reflect the economics of its transactions.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS All other new standards, amendments to standards and interpretations that were issued prior to the sign off date and are applicable to future reporting periods are not expected to have a material financial impact on the Courts.

Taxation

The Courts are exempt from all forms of taxation except Fringe Benefits Tax (FBT) and the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

Revenues, expenses and assets are recognised net of GST except: a) where the amount of GST incurred is not recoverable from the Australian Taxation Office; and b) for receivables and payables.

Reporting of Administered activities

Administered revenues, expenses, assets, liabilities and cash flows are disclosed in the administered schedules and related notes. Except where otherwise stated below, administered items are accounted for on the same basis and using the same policies as for departmental items, including the application of Australian Accounting Standards.

Events after the Reporting Period

On 1 July 2016, the corporate services functions of the Federal Court, and Family Court and Federal Circuit Court merged into a single administrative entity pursuant to the Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act 2016.

Corporate services include communications, finance, human resources, information technology, procurement and contract management, property, risk oversight and management and statistics. All assets, liabilities and commitments of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court were transferred to the Federal Court. The Federal Court administrative entity continues to be subject to the PGPA Act. Each court will have a separate budget allocation and maintain their distinct statutory identities.

14 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

164 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

1. Financial Performance This section analyses the financial performance of the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court for the year ended 30 June 2016. 1.1 Expenses 2016 2015 $'000 $'000

1.1A: Employee Benefits Justices and Judges remuneration 33,415 33,347 Justices leave and other entitlements 1,825 1,726 Judges leave and other entitlements 2,555 2,640 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Justices and Judges notional superannuation 11,099 10,918 Wages and salaries 49,728 50,346 Superannuation Defined contribution plans 8,006 7,798 Defined benefit plans 4,386 4,288 Leave and other entitlements 8,167 8,193 Separation and redundancies 529 65 Total Justices, Judges and employee benefits 119,710 119,321

Accounting Policy Accounting policies for employee related expenses is contained in the People and Relationships section.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 1.1B: Suppliers Goods and services supplied or rendered IT & communications 5,210 5,247 Consultants & contractors* 2,509 1,680 Property 6,817 6,834 Property - resources received free of charge - DoF 19,074 18,889 Courts operation and administration 12,293 11,907 Travel 4,613 4,054 Resources received free of charge - Federal Court 9,862 9,865 Other 1,491 1,615 Total goods and services supplied or rendered 61,869 60,091

Goods supplied 1,034 1,047 Services rendered 60,835 59,044 Total goods and services supplied or rendered 61,869 60,091

Other suppliers Operating lease rentals in connection with Minimum lease payments 13,578 13,868 Contingent rentals 492 728 Workers compensation expenses 641 864 Total other suppliers 14,711 15,460 Total suppliers 76,580 75,551

*KPMG was engaged by the ANAO in 2015–16 to provide financial statement audit services to the Courts. KPMG provided other services and fees for other services were nil in 2016 (2015: $50,400).

15 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 165 7

Leasing commitments Operating leases included are effectively non-cancellable and are in the nature of office leases and motor vehicle leases.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 Commitments for minimum lease payments in relation to non-cancellable operating leases are payables as follows: Within 1 year 8,009 6,249 Between 1 to 5 years 21,551 15,647 More than 5 years 9,269 7,101 Total operating lease commitments 38,829 28,997 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Accounting Policy A distinction is made between finance leases and operating leases. Finance leases effectively transfer from the lessor to the lessee substantially all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of leased assets. An operating lease is a lease that is not a finance lease. In operating leases, the lessor effectively retains substantially all such risks and benefits. Where an asset is acquired by means of a finance lease, the asset is capitalised at either the fair value of the lease property or, if lower, the present value of minimum lease payments at the inception of the contract and a liability is recognised at the same time and for the same amount. The discount rate used is the interest rate implicit in the lease. Leased assets are amortised over the period of the lease. Lease payments are allocated between the principal component and the interest expense. Operating lease payments are expensed on a straight-line basis which is representative of the pattern of benefits derived from the leased assets.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 1.1C: Finance Costs Finance leases 83 86 Unwinding of discount – make good 112 128 Total finance costs 195 214

Accounting Policy All borrowing costs are expensed as incurred.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 1.1D: Write-Down and Impairment of Assets Impairment of inventories 2 - Other - 13 Total write-down and impairment of assets 2 13

16 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

166 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

1.2 Own-Source Revenue and Gains 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 Own-Source Revenue 1.2A: Sale of Goods and Rendering of Services Sale of goods 3 2 Rendering of services 1,089 1,272 Total sale of goods and rendering of services 1,092 1,274

Accounting Policy

Revenue from the sale of goods is recognised when: FINANCIAL STATEMENTS a) the risks and rewards of ownership have been transferred to the buyer; b) the Courts retain no managerial involvement or effective control over the goods; c) the revenue and transaction costs incurred can be reliably measured; and d) it is probable that the economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the Courts.

Revenue from rendering of services is recognised by reference to the stage of completion of contracts at the reporting date. The revenue is recognised when: a) the amount of revenue, stage of completion and transaction costs incurred can be reliably measured; and b) the probable economic benefits associated with the transaction will flow to the Courts.

The stage of completion of contracts at the reporting date is determined by reference to the proportion that costs incurred to date bear to the estimated total costs of the transaction.

Receivables for goods and services, which have 30 day terms, are recognised at the nominal amounts due less any impairment allowance account. Collectability of debts is reviewed at the end of the reporting period. Allowances are made when collectability of the debt is no longer probable.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 1.2B: Other Revenue Resources received free of charge - remuneration of auditors 95 95 Other 594 694 Total other revenue 689 789

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 1.2C: Other Gains Resources received free of charge: Resources received free of charge - from the DoF 19,074 18,889 Resources received free of charge - from the FCA 9,861 9,865 Liabilities assumed by related entities - Justices and Judges superannuation 11,100 10,918 Total other gains 40,035 39,672

17 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 167 7

Accounting Policy Resources Received Free of Charge Resources received free of charge are recognised as gains when, and only when, a fair value can be reliably determined and the services would have been purchased if they had not been donated. Use of those resources is recognised as an expense.

Contributions of assets at no cost of acquisition or for nominal consideration are recognised as gains at their fair value when the asset qualifies for recognition, unless received from another Government entity as a consequence of a restructuring of administrative arrangements. The Courts recognise the following revenue and corresponding expense items as “Resources received free of charge”: - Resources received free of charge from the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) – audit services. - Resources received free of charge from the Department of Finance (DoF) – use of Commonwealth Law Courts. - Resources received free of charge from the Federal Court of Australia (FCA) – library services and migrations & registry services. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Resources received free of charge – Justices and Judges notional superannuation.

Accounting Policy Revenue from Government Amounts appropriated for departmental appropriations for the year (adjusted for any formal additions and reductions) are recognised as Revenue from Government when the Courts gain control of the appropriation except for certain amounts that related to activities that are reciprocal in nature, in which case revenue is recognised only when it has been earned. Appropriations receivable are recognised at their nominal amounts.

Prior year appropriations were unavailable to the Courts on 1 July 2013 to meet existing commitments, as an FMA Act section 32 determination was not provided to enable their transfer (refer to Note 11 Restructuring for effect on assets and liabilities) Such s32 determination transfers are accounted for against equity and are not included in current year revenue.

18 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

168 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

2. Income and Expenses Administered on Behalf of Government This section analyses the activities that the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court does not control but administers on behalf of the Government. Unless otherwise noted, the accounting policies adopted are consistent with those applied for departmental reporting. 2.1 Administered – Expenses 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 2.1A: Suppliers Services rendered Supply of primary dispute resolution services 525 291

Total suppliers 525 291 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

2.1B: Write-Down and Impairment of Assets Other 800 382 Total write-down and impairment of assets 800 382

2.1C: Other Expenses Refunds of fees 243 270 Total other expenses 243 270

2.2 Administered – Income 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 Revenue Non-Taxation Revenue 2.2A: Fees and Fines Fees 59,871 58,053 Fines 139 67 Total fees and fines 60,010 58,120

Accounting Policy All administered revenues are revenues relating to the course of ordinary activities performed by the Court on behalf of the Australian Government. Fees are charged for access to the Courts’ services. Administered fee revenue is recognised when an application for the service is lodged with the Courts. It is recognised at its nominal amount.

19 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 169 7

3. Financial Position This section analyses the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court assets used to conduct its operations and the operating liabilities incurred as a result. Employee related information is disclosed in the People and Relationships section. 3.1 Financial Assets 2016 2015 $'000 $'000

3.1A: Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash at bank 1,328 1,384 Cash on hand 8 12

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Total cash and cash equivalents 1,336 1,396

Accounting Policy Cash is recognised at its nominal amount. Cash and cash equivalents includes: a) cash on hand; b) demand deposits in bank accounts with an original maturity of 3 months or less that are readily convertible to known amounts of cash and subject to insignificant risk of changes in value; and c) cash held by outsiders

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.1B: Trade and Other Receivables Goods and services receivables Goods and services 40 102 Total goods and services receivables 40 102

Appropriations receivable: Appropriation receivable - operating 10,862 15,774 Appropriation receivable - departmental capital budget 868 1,252 Total appropriations receivable 11,730 17,026

Other receivables: Statutory receivables (GST) 1,086 555 Total other receivables 1,086 555 Total trade and other receivables (gross) 12,856 17,683

Total trade and other receivables (net) 12,856 17,683

Trade and other receivables (net) expected to be recovered No more than 12 months 12,856 17,683 More than 12 months - - Total trade and other receivables (net) 12,856 17,683

Trade and other receivables (gross) aged as follows Not overdue 12,831 17,626 Overdue by: 0 to 30 days - - 31 to 60 days 1 - 61 to 90 days - 51 More than 90 days 24 6 Total trade and other receivables (gross) 12,856 17,683 Credit terms for goods and services were within 30 days (2015: 30 days)

20 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

170 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Accounting Policy Loans and receivables Trade receivables, loan and other receivables that have fixed or determinable payments that are not quoted in an active market are classified as 'loans and receivables'. Loans and receivables are measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method less impairment.

3.2 Non-Financial Assets FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 3.2A: Reconciliation of the Opening and Closing Balances of Property, Plant and Equipment and Intangibles Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment for 2016 Buildings - Leasehold Plant and Computer Improvements equipment software 1 Total $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 As at 1 July 2015 Gross book value 33,675 20,339 15,029 69,043 Accumulated depreciation, amortisation and impairment (9,079) (8,875) (9,124) (27,078) Total as at 1 July 2015 24,596 11,464 5,905 41,965 Additions Purchase 3,836 2,266 1,289 7,391 Internally developed - - - - Finance lease - - - Capital Incentive 652 - - 652 Revaluations and impairments recognised in other comprehensive income - - - - Depreciation and amortisation (3,878) (4,332) (1,385) (9,595) Disposals Other (1) (54) - (55) Total as at 30 June 2016 25,205 9,344 5,809 40,358

Total as at 30 June 2016 represented by Gross book value 37,925 22,180 16,318 76,423 Accumulated depreciation and impairment (12,720) (12,836) (10,509) (36,065) Total as at 30 June 2016 25,205 9,344 5,809 40,358

1. The carrying amount of computer software included $1.48m purchased software and $4.33m internally generated software.

No indicators of impairment were found for property, plant and equipment and intangibles. No property, plant and equipment and intangibles are expected to be sold or disposed of within the next 12 months.

Revaluations of non-financial assets All revaluations were conducted in accordance with the revaluation policy. On 30 June 2013, an independent valuer (Preston Rowe Paterson NSW Pty Limited) conducted the revaluations. There was no full revaluation undertaken in 2015-16.

21 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 171 7

Contractual commitments for the acquisition of property, plant, equipment and intangible assets Capital commitments for plant and equipment was nil (2015: $0.142m). Plant and equipment commitments were primarily contracts for purchases of furniture and IT equipment.

Reconciliation of the opening and closing balances of property, plant and equipment for 2015 Buildings - Leasehold Plant and Computer Improvements equipment software Total $’000 $’000 $’000 $’000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS As at 1 July 2014 Gross book value 30,226 18,456 13,057 61,739 Accumulated depreciation/amortisation and impairment (5,203) (4,407) (7,495) (17,105) Total as at 1 July 2014 25,023 14,049 5,562 44,634 Additions Purchase 3,471 2,275 697 6,443 Internally developed - - 1,275 1,275 Finance lease 292 - - 292 Depreciation and amortisation (4,190) (4,784) (1,629) (10,603) Disposals Other - Without proceeds - (13) - (13) Other - With proceeds - (63) - (63) Total as at 30 June 2015 24,596 11,464 5,905 41,965

Total as at 30 June 2015 represented by Gross book value 33,675 20,339 15,029 69,043 Accumulated depreciation, amortisation and impairment (9,079) (8,875) (9,124) (27,078) Total as at 30 June 2015 24,596 11,464 5,905 41,965

Accounting Policy Property, plant and equipment Assets are recorded at cost on acquisition except as stated below. The cost of acquisition includes the fair value of assets transferred in and liabilities undertaken. Financial assets are initially measured at their fair value plus transaction costs where appropriate. Assets acquired at no cost, or for nominal consideration, are initially recognised as assets and income at their fair value at the date of acquisition, unless acquired as a consequence of restructuring of administrative arrangements. In the latter case, assets are initially recognised as contributions by owners at the amounts at which they were recognised in the transferor's accounts immediately prior to the restructuring. Asset Recognition Threshold Purchases of property, plant and equipment are recognised initially at cost in the statement of financial position, except for purchases costing less than $2,000, which are expensed in the year of acquisition (other than where they form part of a group of similar items which are significant in total). The initial cost of an asset includes an estimate of the cost of dismantling and removing the item and restoring the site on which it is located. This is particularly relevant to ‘make good’ provisions in property leases taken up by the Courts where there exists an obligation to restore the property to its original condition. These costs are included in the value of the Courts’ leasehold improvements with a corresponding provision for the ‘make good’ recognised. Revaluations Following initial recognition at cost, property plant and equipment were carried at fair value less subsequent accumulated depreciation and accumulated impairment losses. Valuations were conducted with sufficient frequency to ensure that the carrying amounts of assets did not differ materially from the assets’ fair values as at the reporting date. The regularity of independent valuations depended upon the volatility of movements in market values for the relevant assets.

22 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

172 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Revaluation adjustments were made on a class basis. Any revaluation increment was credited to equity under the heading of asset revaluation reserve except to the extent that it reversed a previous revaluation decrement of the same asset class that was previously recognised in the surplus/deficit. Revaluation decrements for a class of assets were recognised directly in the surplus/deficit except to the extent that they reversed a previous revaluation increment for that class. Any accumulated depreciation as at the revaluation date is eliminated against the gross carrying amount of the asset and the asset restated to the revalued amount. Depreciation Depreciable property, plant and equipment assets are written-off to their estimated residual values over their estimated useful lives to the Courts using, in all cases, the straight-line method of depreciation. Land and buildings – leasehold improvements are depreciated on a straight-line basis over the lesser of the estimated useful life of the improvements or the unexpired period of the lease.

Depreciation rates (useful lives), residual values and methods are reviewed at each reporting date and necessary adjustments FINANCIAL STATEMENTS are recognised in the current, or current and future reporting periods, as appropriate. Depreciation rates applying to each class of depreciable asset are based on the following useful lives:

2016 2016 2015 Leasehold improvements lease term lease term Property, plant and equipment 2 to 15 years 2 to 15 years

Impairment All assets were assessed for impairment at 30 June 2016. Where indications of impairment exist, the asset’s recoverable amount is estimated and an impairment adjustment made if the asset’s recoverable amount is less than its carrying amount. The recoverable amount of an asset is the higher of its fair value less costs to sell and its value in use. Value in use is the present value of the future cash flows expected to be derived from the asset. Where the future economic benefit of an asset is not primarily dependent on the asset’s ability to generate future cash flows, and the asset would be replaced if the Courts were deprived of the asset, its value in use is taken to be its depreciated replacement cost. Derecognition An item of property, plant and equipment is derecognised upon disposal or when no further future economic benefits are expected from its use or disposal.

Intangibles The Courts’ intangibles comprise internally developed software and purchased externally software for internal use. These assets are carried at cost less accumulated amortisation and accumulated impairment losses. Software is amortised on a straight-line basis over its anticipated useful life. The useful life of the Courts’ software is 3 to 7 years (2015: 3 to 7 years). All software assets were assessed for indications of impairment as at 30 June 2016.

Accounting Policy Inventories held for sale are valued at the lower of cost and net realisable value. Inventories held for distribution are valued at cost, adjusted for any loss of service potential. Costs incurred in bringing each item of inventory to its present location and condition are assigned as follows: a) raw materials and stores - purchase cost on a first-in-first-out basis; and b) finished goods and work in progress - cost of direct materials and labour plus attributable costs that can be allocated on a reasonable basis. Inventories acquired at no cost or nominal consideration are initially measured at current replacement cost at the date of acquisition.

23 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 173 7

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.2B: Other Non-Financial Assets Prepayments 1,917 1,955 Total other non-financial assets 1,917 1,955

Other non-financial assets expected to be recovered No more than 12 months 1,902 1,955 More than 12 months 15 - Total other non-financial assets 1,917 1,955

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS No indicators of impairment were found for other non-financial assets.

24 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

174 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

3.3 Payables 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.3A: Suppliers Trade creditors and accruals 1,350 3,297 Operating lease rentals 1,381 546 Total suppliers 2,731 3,843

Suppliers expected to be settled No more than 12 months 2,730 3,696

More than 12 months 1 147 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Total suppliers 2,731 3,843

Settlement was usually made within 30 days.

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.3B: Other Payables Salaries and wages 324 2,018 Superannuation 35 301 Separations and redundancies 482 - Employee liabilities 2,275 - Unearned income 109 201 Statutory payable (FBT) 486 452 Other 6 20 Total other payables 3,717 2,992

Other payables to be settled No more than 12 months 3,717 2,992 Total other payables 3,717 2,992

3.4 Interest Bearing Liabilities 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.4A: Leases Finance leases 2,879 3,271 Total leases 2,879 3,271

Minimum leases payments expected to be settled including finance charges Within 1 year 489 476 Between 1 to 5 years 2,114 2,051 More than 5 years 521 1,074 Total leases 3,124 3,601

In 2015, a Finance lease existed in relation to building and property, plant and equipment assets. The lease was non- cancellable and for a fixed term of 8 years. The interest rate implicit in the lease was 2.7%. The lease assets secure the lease liabilities.

25 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 175 7

3.5 Other Provisions

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 3.5A: Other Provisions Provision for restoration obligations 2,863 2,885 Total other provisions 2,863 2,885

Other provisions expected to be settled No more than 12 months 190 1,565 More than 12 months 2,673 1,320 Total other provisions 2,863 2,885

Provision for Total restoration $’000 $’000

As at 1 July 2015 2,885 2,885 Additional provisions made - - Change in provisions (133) (133) Amounts used - - Unwinding of discount 111 111 Total as at 30 June 2016 2,863 2,863

The Courts currently has 10 agreements for the leasing of premises which have provisions requiring the Courts to restore the premises to their original condition at the conclusion of the lease. The Courts has made a provision to reflect the present value of this obligation.

26 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

176 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

4. Assets and Liabilities Administered on Behalf of Government This section analyses assets used to generate financial performance and the operating liabilities incurred as a result the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court does not control but administers on behalf of the Government. Unless otherwise noted, the accounting policies adopted are consistent with those applied for departmental reporting. 4.1 Administered – Financial Assets 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 4.1A: Cash and Cash Equivalents Cash on hand or on deposit 166 583 Total cash and cash equivalents 166 583 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 4.1B: Trade and Other Receivables Goods and services receivables 7,502 1,447 Total goods and services receivables 7,502 1,447

Other receivables Statutory receivable (GST) 12 3 Total other receivables 12 3 Total trade and other receivables (gross) 7,514 1,450

Less impairment allowance account: Goods and services (489) (132) Total impairment allowance (489) (132) Total trade and other receivables (net) 7,025 1,318

Trade and other receivables (net) expected to be recovered in: No more than 12 months 7,025 1,318 Total trade and other receivables (net) 7,025 1,318

Trade and other receivables (gross) aged as follows Not overdue - - Overdue by 0 to 30 days 1,034 633 31 to 60 days 1,119 414 61 to 90 days 1,077 291 More than 90 days 4,284 112 Total trade and other receivables (gross) 7,514 1,450

The impairment allowance account is aged as follows: Not overdue - - Overdue by 0 to 30 days (38) - 31 to 60 days (66) - 61 to 90 days (62) (77) More than 90 days (323) (55) Total impairment allowance account (489) (132)

27 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 177 7

Reconciliation of the Impairment Allowance Account:

Movements in relation to 2016 Goods and services Total $'000 $'000 As at 1 July 2015 132 132 Amounts written off (122) (122) Increase recognised in net contribution by services 479 479 Total as at 30 June 2016 489 489

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Movements in relation to 2015 Goods and services Total $'000 $'000 As at 1 July 2014 54 54 Amounts written off (23) (23) Increase recognised in net contribution by services 101 101 Total as at 30 June 2015 132 132

Accounting Policy Collectability of debts is reviewed at the end of the reporting period. Allowances are made when collection of debts is judged to be less rather than likely.

28 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

178 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

4.2 Administered - Payables 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 4.2A: Suppliers Trade creditors and accruals - 40 Total supplier payables - 40

Suppliers expected to be settled No more than 12 months - 40 More than 12 months - -

Total supplier payables - 40 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

4.2B: Other Payables Unearned income 453 Total other payables 453 -

Other payables expected to be settled No more than 12 months 453 - More than 12 months - - Total other payables 453 -

29 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 179 7 30

2 - - - - - 328 328 328 (384) (384) $'000 (4,442) (4,442) (4,826) Variance

- - - - - 564 564 564 7,782 $'000 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 159,643 167,425 prior years) (current and Appropriation applied in 2016

- - - - - 892 892 892 7,398 Total $'000 155,201 162,599

appropriation

------$'000 Transfers Section 75

------PGPA Act Act PGPA 2,699 2,699 $'000 Receipts Section 74

------$'000 Advance to the Finance Minister Minister Finance

1 - - - - - 892 892 892 7,398 $'000 Appropriation Act Act Appropriation Annual Annual 152,502 159,900 Appropriation

Equity Equity Loans items Administered entities Commonwealth to Corporate Payments and liabilities assets Administered entities Commonwealth to Corporate Payments Appropriations Ordinary annual services Budget Capital Other services Ordinary annual services Other services Funding Funding 5.1A: Appropriations Annual ('Recoverable GST exclusive') 2016 for Appropriations Annual Departmental Total departmental Administered Total administered Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements Statements Financial 2015-2016 Report – Annual Court Circuit Federal Court & Family 5. structure. funding Court Circuit Federal & Court Family the identifies section This 5.1 quarantined. been have that no appropriations were there 2015-16, In 1. ($5,297,000). receivable appropriation and $531,000 receivable GST net ($60,000), cash in movement reflects variance material The 2.

180 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7 31

------(2) 632 632 632 (224) (224) $'000 $'000 (4,113) (4,113) (4,337) Variance

------252 252 252 $'000 $'000 8,124 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS years) 164,001 172,125

Appropriation Appropriation applied in 2015 2015 in applied (current and prior prior and (current

------884 884 884 Total Total $'000 $'000 7,900 159,888 167,788

appropriation

------$'000 $'000

Transfers Section 75 75 Section

------PGPA Act Act PGPA $'000 $'000 3,305 3,305

Receipts Section 74 74 Section

------$'000 $'000

Advance to the the to Advance Finance Minister

------(1) 884 884 884 $'000 $'000 7,900 Appropriation Act Act Appropriation Annual Annual 156,583 164,483

Appropriation

Equity Equity Loans Previous years' outputs items Administered entities Commonwealth to Corporate Payments and liabilities assets Administered entities Commonwealth to Corporate Payments Ordinary annual services Budget Capital Other services Ordinary annual services Other services Annual Appropriations for 2015 2015 for Appropriations Annual Departmental Total departmental Administered administered Total Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements Statements Financial 2015-2016 Report – Annual Court Circuit Federal Court & Family 1. In 2014-15, there were no appropriations that have been quarantined. quarantined. been have that no appropriations were there 2014-15, In 1. ($521,000). receivable appropriation and $159,000 receivable GST net ($3,750,000), cash in movement reflects variance material The 2.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 181 7

5.1B: Unspent Annual Appropriations ('Recoverable GST exclusive')

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 Departmental Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2015-16 11,480 - Appropriation Act (No. 3) 2015-16 718 - Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2015-16 - Capital budget 468 - Appropriation Act (No. 3) 2015-16 - Capital budget 400 - Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2014-15 - 17,171 Appropriation Act (No. 1) 2014-15 - Capital budget - 720 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Appropriation Act (No. 3) 2014-15 - Capital budget - 532 Total departmental 13,066 18,423 Administered Appropriation Act (No.1) 2014-15 - 632 Appropriation Act (No 1) 2015-16 328 - Total administered 328 632

5.1C: Special Appropriations ('Recoverable GST exclusive')

Appropriation applied 2016 2015 Authority $'000 $'000 Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013, Section 77, 255 285 Administered

Total 255 285

32 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

182 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

5.2 Special Accounts

5.2A: Special Accounts (Recoverable GST exclusive)

Litigations Fund Special Account (Administered) 2016 2015 $'000 $'000

Balance brought forward from previous period 486 548 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Increases Costs recovered - - Other receipts 640 1,421 Total increases 640 1,421 Available for payments 1,126 1,969 Decreases Administered Payments made (715) (1,483) Total decreases (715) (1,483) Total balance carried to the next period 411 486

1. Appropriation: [Public Governance Performance and Accountability Act section 80]. Establishing Instrument: Determination 2013/06. The Finance Minister has issued a determination under Subsection 20(1) of the FMA ACT 1997 (repealed) establishing the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Litigants’ Fund Special Account when the Courts merged on 1 July 2014. The legislation allows for the continued existence of the Special Account despite the repeal of the FMA Act. Purpose: Litigants Fund Special Account (a) for amounts received in respect of proceedings of the Family Court of Australia or the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (formerly the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia); (b) for amounts received in respect of proceedings that have been transferred from another court to the Family Court of Australia or to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (formerly the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia); (c) for amounts received from the Family Court of Australia Litigants’ Fund Special Account or the Federal Magistrates Court Litigants’ Fund Special Account; (d) to make payments in accordance with an order (however described) made by a court under the Family Law Act 1975, the Family Court of Australia, or a Judge of that Court; (e) to make payments in accordance with an order (however described) made by a court under the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999 (formerly the Federal Magistrates Act 1999), the Federal Circuit Court of Australia (formerly the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia), or a Judge (formerly Federal Magistrate) of that Court; (f) to repay amounts received by the Commonwealth and credited to this Special Account where an Act of Parliament or other law requires or permits the amount to be repaid and (g) to reduce the balance of this Special Account without making a real or notional payment.

33 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 183 7

5.3 Cash Flow Reconciliation 2016 2015 $'000 $'000

Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents as per statement of financial position to cash flow statement

Cash and cash equivalents as per Cash flow statement 1,336 1,396 Statement of financial position 1,336 1,396

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Discrepancy - -

Reconciliation of net cost of services to net cash from/(used by) operating activities Net (cost of)/contribution by services (164,297) (164,021) Revenue from Government 152,502 148,683

Adjustments for non-cash items Depreciation/amortisation 9,595 10,603 Loss on disposal of assets 31 54 Finance lease represented in accruals - 62 Lease incentive represented in capital spending (652) - Make good provision represented in reserves 133 - Movement in the appropriation receivable recognised in equity (386) (223)

Movements in assets and liabilities Assets (Increase)/Decrease in net receivables 4,827 4,462 (Increase)/Decrease in inventories (1) 10 Increase/(Decrease) in prepayments received 38 (111) Liabilities Increase/(Decrease) in employee provisions (1,466) 1,093 Increase/(Decrease) in supplier payables (1,112) (87) Increase/(Decrease) in other payable 725 96 Increase/(Decrease) in other provisions (22) (486) Net cash from/(used by) operating activities (85) 135

34 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

184 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

5.3B: Administered – Cash Flow Reconciliation 2016 2015 $'000 $'000

Reconciliation of cash and cash equivalents as per statement of financial position and cash flow statement

Cash and cash equivalents as per Administered cash flow statement 166 583 Administered schedule of assets and liabilities 166 583

Discrepancy - - FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Reconciliation of net contribution by services to net cash from operating activities: Net contribution by services 58,442 57,177

Movements in assets and liabilities Assets Increase in net receivables (5,707) (582) Liabilities Decrease in supplier payables (40) 40 Increase in other payables 453 - Net cash from operating activities 53,148 56,635

35 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 185 7

6. People and Relationships This section describes a range of employment and post-employment benefits provided to our people and our relationships with other key people. 6.1 Employee Provisions

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 6.1A: Employee Provisions Annual leave 5,295 6,204 Judges annual leave 4,457 4,532

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Long service leave 9,981 11,572 Judges long service leave 4,806 4,786 Justices long leave 10,054 8,965 Total employee provisions 34,593 36,059

Employee provisions expected to be settled No more than 12 months 9,783 10,129 More than 12 months 24,810 25,930 Total employee provisions 34,593 36,059

Accounting Policy Liabilities for ‘short-term employee benefits’ (as defined in AASB 119 Employee Benefits) and termination benefits expected within twelve months of the end of reporting period are measured at their nominal amounts. The nominal amount is calculated with regard to the rates expected to be paid on settlement of the liability. Justices, Judges and other long-term employee benefits are measured as net total of the present value of the defined benefit obligation at the end of the reporting period minus the fair value at the end of the reporting period of plan assets (if any) out of which the obligations are to be settled directly. Leave The liability for employee benefits includes provision for annual leave and long service leave. No provision has been made for sick leave as all sick leave is non-vesting and the average sick leave taken in future years by employees of the Courts are estimated to be less than the annual entitlement for sick leave. The leave liabilities are calculated on the basis of employees' remuneration at the estimated salary rates that will be applied at the time the leave is taken, including the Courts’ employer superannuation contribution rates to the extent that the leave is likely to be taken during service rather than paid out on termination. The liability for annual leave and long service leave has been determined by reference to the work of an actuary as at 30 June 2015 and is reviewed every three years. The estimate of the present value of the liability takes into account attrition rates and pay increases through promotion and inflation. Separation and Redundancy Provision is made for separation and redundancy benefit payments. The Courts recognise a provision for termination when it has developed a detailed formal plan for the terminations and has informed those employees affected that it will carry out the terminations. Superannuation The majority of the Courts’ staff (excluding the Judiciary) are members of the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS), the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme (PSS) or the PSS accumulation plan (PSSap). The CSS and PSS are defined benefit schemes for the Australian Government. The PSSap is a defined contribution scheme. The liability for defined benefits is recognised in the financial statements of the Australian Government and is settled by the Australian Government in due course. This liability is reported in the Department of Finance's administered schedules and notes. The Courts make employer contributions to the employees' superannuation scheme at rates determined by an actuary to be sufficient to meet the current cost to the Government. The Courts’ accounts for the contributions as if they were contributions to defined contribution plans. Federal Circuit Court Judges and certain non-ongoing staff are not members of these schemes. The Courts contribute to eligible superannuation funds nominated by the employees.

36 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

186 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

The Courts’ Justices are entitled to a non-contributory pension upon retirement after 10 years. As the liability for these pension payments is assumed by the Australian Government, the Courts do not recognise a liability for unfunded superannuation liability. It does, however, recognise a revenue and corresponding expense item "Resources received free of charge - Justices and Judges Superannuation." The liability for superannuation recognised as at 30 June 2016 represents outstanding contributions for the final fortnight of the year.

6.2 Senior Management Personnel Remuneration 2016 2015 $ $

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Short-term employee benefits Salary 1,750,330 1,452,251 Vehicle allowance 94,038 72,431 Other 73,960 64,043 Total short-term employee benefits 1,918,328 1,588,725

Post-employment benefits Superannuation 326,618 289,443 Total post-employment benefits 326,618 289,443

Other long-term employee benefits Annual leave 145,236 149,257 Long-service leave 47,351 48,662 Total other long-term employee benefits 192,587 197,919

Termination benefits 218,675 - Total senior executive remuneration expenses 2,656,208 2,076,087

The total number of senior management personnel that are included in the above table are 11 (2015: 9).

37 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 187 7

7. Managing Uncertainties This section analyses how the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court manages financial risks within its operating environment. 7.1 Contingent Liabilities and Assets

7.1A: Contingent Liabilities and Assets Quantifiable Contingencies The Courts had no quantifiable contingent assets or liabilities as at 30 June 2016 (2015: none).

Unquantifiable Contingencies At 30 June 2016, the Courts had two legal claims against it. It is not possible to estimate the amount of any eventual FINANCIAL STATEMENTS payments that may be required in relation to these claims (2015: none).

Accounting Policy Contingent liabilities and contingent assets are not recognised in the statement of financial position but are reported in the notes. They may arise from uncertainty as to the existence of a liability or asset or represent an asset or liability in respect of which the amount cannot be reliably measured. Contingent assets are disclosed when settlement is probable but not virtually certain and contingent liabilities are disclosed when settlement is greater than remote.

7.1B: Administered Contingent Assets and Liabilities The Courts have no quantifiable or unquantifiable administered contingent liabilities or assets as at 30 June 2016 (2015: none).

7.2 Financial Instruments 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 7.2A: Categories of Financial Instruments Financial Assets Loans and receivables Cash and cash equivalents 1,336 1,396 Trade and other receivables 40 102 Total financial assets 1,376 1,498

Financial Liabilities Financial liabilities measured at amortised cost Trade creditors 57 1,836 Finance leases 2,878 3,271 Total financial liabilities 2,935 5,107

Accounting Policy Financial Assets The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court classifies its financial assets in the following categories: a) financial assets at fair value through profit or loss; b) held-to-maturity investments; c) available-for-sale financial assets; and d) loans and receivables.

The classification depends on the nature and purpose of the financial assets and is determined at the time of initial recognition. Financial assets are recognised and derecognised upon trade date. The Courts only hold financial assets classified as loan and receivables.

38 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

188 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

Effective Interest Method The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial asset and of allocating interest income over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash receipts through the expected life of the financial asset, or, where appropriate, a shorter period. Income is recognised on an effective interest rate basis except for financial assets that are recognised at fair value through profit or loss. Impairment of Financial Assets Financial assets are assessed for impairment at the end of each reporting period. Financial assets held at amortised cost - if there is objective evidence that an impairment loss has been incurred for loans and receivables or held to maturity investments held at amortised cost, the amount of the loss is measured as the difference

between the asset's carrying amount and the present value of estimated future cash flows discounted at the asset's original FINANCIAL STATEMENTS effective interest rate. The carrying amount is reduced by way of an allowance account. The loss is recognised in the Statement of Comprehensive Income. Financial Liabilities Financial liabilities are classified as either financial liabilities 'at fair value through profit or loss' or other financial liabilities. Financial liabilities are recognised and derecognised upon 'trade date'. Other Financial Liabilities Other financial liabilities are initially measured at fair value, net of transaction costs. These liabilities are subsequently measured at amortised cost using the effective interest method, with interest expense recognised on an effective yield basis. The effective interest method is a method of calculating the amortised cost of a financial liability and of allocating interest expense over the relevant period. The effective interest rate is the rate that exactly discounts estimated future cash payments through the expected life of the financial liability, or, where appropriate, a shorter period. Supplier and other payables are recognised at amortised cost. Liabilities are recognised to the extent that the goods or services have been received (and irrespective of having been invoiced).

2016 2015 $'000 $'000 7.2B: Net Gains or Losses on Financial Liabilities Financial liabilities measured at amortised cost Interest expense 83 86 Net gains/(losses) on financial liabilities measured at amortised cost 83 86

7.2C: Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying amounts of the Court's financial assets and liabilities are a reasonable approximation of the fair value.

39 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 189 7

7.2D: Credit Risk The Courts are exposed to minimal credit risk as loans and receivables are cash and trade receivables. The maximum exposure to credit risk is the risk that arises from potential default of a debtor. This amount is equal to the total amount of trade receivables $40,501 (2015: $102,000). The Courts have assessed the risk of the default on payment and have allocated nil in 2016 and 2015 to the impairment allowance account for trade receivable.

The Courts manage credit risk by restricting credit to approved customers. In addition the Courts have policies and procedures that guide employee's debt recovery techniques that are to be applied.

The Courts hold no collateral to mitigate against credit risk.

Credit quality of financial instruments not past due or individually determined as impaired FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Not past due Not past due Past due or Past due nor nor impaired nor impaired impaired impaired 2016 2015 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000

Cash and cash equivalents 1,336 1,396 - - Trade receivables 15 45 25 57 Total 1,351 1,441 25 57

Ageing of financial assets that were past due but not impaired for 2016 0 to 30 days 31 to 60 days 61 to 90 days 90+ days Total $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Loans and receivables Trade receivables 1 - 24 25 Total 1 - 24 25

Ageing of financial assets that were past due but not impaired for 2015 0 to 30 days 31 to 60 days 61 to 90 days 90+ days Total $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Loans and receivables Trade receivables - 51 6 57 Total - 51 6 57

40 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

190 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

7.2E: Liquidity Risk The Courts' financial liabilities are payables to suppliers. The exposure to liquidity risk is based on the notion that the Courts will encounter difficulty in meeting its obligations associated with financial liabilities.

This is highly unlikely as the Courts are appropriated funding from the Australian Government and the Courts manage budgeted funds to ensure it has adequate funds to meet payments as they fall due. In addition, the Courts have policies in place to ensure timely payments are made when due and have no past experience of default.

Maturities for non-derivative financial liabilities 2016 Between Between More than On Within 1 1 to 2 2 to 5 5 demand year years years years Total FINANCIAL STATEMENTS $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Trade creditors - 57 - - - 57 Finance leases - 489 505 1,609 521 3,124 Total - 546 505 1,609 521 3,181

Maturities for non-derivative financial liabilities 2015 Between Between More than On Within 1 1 to 2 2 to 5 5 demand year years years years Total $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Trade creditors - 1,836 - - - 1,836 Finance leases - 476 490 1,561 1,074 3,601 Total - 2,312 490 1,561 1,074 5,437

7.2F: Market Risk The Courts hold basic financial instruments that did not exposed the Courts to certain market risks, such as 'currency risk' and 'other price risk'. Interest rate risk The only interest-bearing item on the statement of financial position was the 'finance leases'. They bear interest at a fixed interest rate and its value did not fluctuate due to changes in the market interest rate.

41 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 191 7

7.3 Administered - Financial Instruments 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 7.3A: Categories of Financial Instruments Financial Assets Loans and receivables Cash and cash equivalents 166 583 Carrying amount of financial assets 166 583

Financial Liabilities

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS At amortised cost Suppliers - - Carrying amount of financial liabilities - -

7.3B: Fair Value of Financial Instruments The carrying amounts of the Courts' financial assets and liabilities are a reasonable approximation of the fair value.

7.3C: Credit Risk The Courts' maximum exposure to credit risk at the reporting date in relation to each class of recognised financial assets is the carrying amounts of those assets as indicated in the administered schedule of assets and liabilities. The Courts' credit risk policy is to restrict credit to approved customers and in this case the maximum exposure to credit risk is the carrying amount of the related financial assets. The Courts have no significant exposure to any concentrations of credit risk. The Courts hold no collateral to mitigate against credit risk.

7.3D: Liquidity Risk All financial liabilities are short-term with settlement terms of 30 days. The Courts' governance and internal control framework ensures that obligations associated with financial liabilities are able to be met as and when they fall due. The Courts have no derivative financial liabilities in either the current or prior year.

7.3E: Market Risk The Courts have no exposure to market risk including currency risk, other price risk or interest rate risk.

42 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

192 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7 43

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Inputs used

New replacement cost, consumed economic benefits and obsolesce of asset Comparable service capacity, adjusted for obsolescence

1 For Levels 2 3 and fair value measurements

Valuation technique(s) Depreciated replacement cost Depreciated replacement cost

) 4

Level 3 Level 2 2 or 3 Category (Level 1,

2015 $'000 $'000 24,596 24,596 11,464 reporting period

2016 9,344 $'000 25,205 25,205 Fair value measurements at the end of the

2 Fair MeasurementsValue Leasehold improvements improvements Leasehold equipment and plant property Other 7.4A:Fair Value Measurements, Valuation Techniques and Inputs Used assets Financial Non-financial assets period. the during occurred technique valuation in change No 1. 2. The highestbest and usenon-financial of all assets are the same as their currentuse. Position. Financial of in Statement the value fair at measured not are Court Circuit Court and Federal Family the by reported and liabilities assets remaining 3. The Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements Statements Financial 2015-2016 Report – Annual Court Circuit Federal Court & Family 7.4 The following tables provide an of analysis assets and liabilities that are measured at fair value. The different levels of the fair value hierarchy are defined below. Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the entity can access at measurement date. or indirectly. directly either or liability, asset the for observable 1 are that Level within included prices quoted other than 2: Inputs Level or liability. asset the for inputs 3: Unobservable Level Policy Accounting services valuation procured Courts The date. reporting each at value fair the from materially differ not does amount carrying the that ensure to regularity sufficient with performed are Valuations PRP 12 months. every once least at model valuation the of procedures the tests Courts The PRP. by provided models on valuation relied and (PRP) Ltd Pty NSW Paterson Rowe Preston from 2015-16. in undertaken revaluation no full was There 13. AASB with compliance in is developed model the that Courts the to assurance written provided

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 193 7 44

- - - - - 2015 $'000

- - - - - FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 2016 $'000 Non-financial liabilities liabilities Non-financial

- - - - - 2015 $'000

- - - - - 2016 Financial liabilities liabilities Financial $'000

- 2015 3,763 $'000 25,023 25,023 24,596 (4,190) (4,190)

(1) 2016 4,488 $'000 24,596 24,596 25,205 (3,878) (3,878) Leasehold improvements Non-financial assets

- - - - 2015 $'000

- - - - Financial assets assets Financial 2016 $'000 1 Purchases Depreciation on Disposals Gain/Loss Note 7.4B: Reconciliation for Recurring Level 3 Fair Measurements Value Recurring Level 3 fair value measurements - reconciliation for assets As at 1 July Total as at 30 June 1. These gains/(losses) are presented in the Statement of Comprehensive Income under Losses from assets sales. Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements Statements Financial 2015-2016 Report – Annual Court Circuit Federal Court & Family

194 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 7

8. Other Information This section provides other disclosures relevant to the Family Court & Federal Circuit Court financial information environment for the year. 8.1 Reporting of Outcomes 8.1A: Net Cost of Outcome Delivery

Outcome 1 Total 2016 2015 2016 2015 $'000 $'000 $'000 $'000 Departmental

Expenses (206,113) (205,756) (206,113) (205,756) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS Own source income 41,816 41,735 41,816 41,735 Administered Expenses (1,568) (943) (1,568) (943) Own source income 60,010 58,120 60,010 58,120 Net cost of outcome delivery (105,855) (106,844) (105,855) (106,844) Assets Financial assets 14,192 19,079 14,192 19,079 Non-financial assets 42,339 43,983 42,339 43,983 Total assets 56,531 63,062 56,531 63,062 Liabilities Payables (6,448) (6,835) (6,448) (6,835) Interest bearing liabilities (2,879) (3,271) (2,879) (3,271) Provisions (37,456) (38,944) (37,456) (38,944) Total liabilities (46,783) (49,050) (46,783) (49,050) Assets Financial assets 7,191 1,901 7,191 1,901 Total assets 7,191 1,901 7,191 1,901 Liabilities Payables (453) (40) (453) (40) Total liabilities (453) (40) (453) (40) Outcome 1 is described in Overview note. Net costs shown include intra-government costs that are eliminated in calculating the actual budget outcome. Refer to Outcome 1 Resourcing Table of this Annual Report.

45 Family Court & Federal Circuit Court – Annual Report 2015-2016 Financial Statements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 195

OVERVIEW OF APPENDIXESTHE COURT

82 8

APPENDIX ONE

Entity resource statement 2015–16

Table 8.1 Entity Resource Statement 2015–16 APPENDIXES

Actual available Payments Balance appropriation made remaining 2015–16 2015–16 2015–16 $’000 $’000 $’000 Ordinary annual services1

Departmental appropriation2 180,6213 167,555 13,0664

Total 180,621 167,555 13,066

Administered expenses

Outcome 15 892 564 3286

Total 892 564 328

Total ordinary annual services 181,513 168,119 13,394

Special Appropriations Special appropriations limited by criteria / entitlement

Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013 s 777 300 255 45

Total 300 255 45

Special accounts8

Opening balance – – –

Appropriation receipts – – –

Total special accounts – – –

Total net resourcing for agency 181,813 168,374 13,439

1 Appropriation Act (No.1) 2015–16 and Appropriation Act (No.3) 2015–16. This also includes Prior Year departmental appropriation and S.74 relevant agency receipts. 2 Includes an amount of $7.398m in 2015–16 for the Departmental Capital Budget. For accounting purposes this amount has been designated as ‘contributions by owners’. 3 Includes $159.500m in Appropriations (Appropriation Bill No. 1 and 3), and $2.699m in section 74 Receipts per Note 5.1A of the Financial Statements, and $1.396m in Cash – Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the reporting period – per Cash Flow Statement, and $17.026m in Appropriations Receivable per Note 3.1B in the Financial Statements. 4 Unspent departmental annual Appropriations per Note 5.1B of the Financial Statements. 5 Administered Appropriations per Note 5.1A of the Financial Statements. 6 Administered appropriation balance remaining per Note 5.1B of the Financial Statements (includes payments of $0.040m for 2014–15 accrued items). 7 Repayments not provided for under other appropriations. Note 5.1C in the Financial Statements. 8 Does not include ‘Special Public Money’ held in accounts like Other Trust Monies Account (OTM).

198 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

APPENDIX TWO

Expenses and resources for outcome 1

Table 8.2 Expenses for Outcome 1 APPENDIXES

Outcome 1: Provide access to justice Budget1 Actual Expenses Variation for litigants in family and federal law 2015–16 2015–16 2015–16 matters within the jurisdiction of the $’000 $’000 $’000 courts through the provision of judicial (a) (b) (a) – (b) and support services. Program 1.1: Family Court and Federal Circuit Court

Administered expenses

Ordinary Annual Services 892 5252 367 (Appropriation Bill No. 1 and No. 3)

Expenses not requiring appropriation 0 8003 -800 in the Budget year

Special appropriations 300 2434 57

Departmental expenses

Departmental Appropriation 156,477 156,388 89 (Appropriation Bill No. 1 and No. 3)5

Expenses not requiring appropriation 50,126 49,725 401 in the Budget year6

Total expenses for Outcome 1 207,795 207,681 114

2014–15 2015–16

Average Staffing Level (number) 775 766

1 Full year budget, including any subsequent adjustment made to the 2015–16 Budget per 2015–16 Estimated Actual expenses in Table 2.1 of the 2015–16 Attorney General’s Portfolio Additional Estimates Statements page 81. 2 Administered Expenses (Services Rendered) per Note 2.1A of the Financial Statements. 3 Includes write down and impairment of assets per Note 2.1B of the Financial Statements. 4 Special appropriations consist of refunds of fees paid under section 77 of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013. 5 Departmental Appropriation combines ‘Ordinary annual services (Appropriation Bill No.1 and No.3) and ‘s 74 retained revenue receipts’. 6 Includes depreciation and amortisation, liabilities assumed by related entities for the Judges’ Pension Scheme (Family Court of Australia), resources received free of charge, and Judges’ Pension Scheme (Invalidity) (Federal Circuit Court of Australia).

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 199 8

APPENDIX THREE

Staffing profile

At 30 June 2016, the entity had a total workforce of 753 employees that either support a APPENDIXES specific court e.g. direct judicial support to a Family Court justice or a Federal Circuit Court judge, or provide shared services e.g. registrars, family consultants, registry services and corporate services. Of the entity's 753 employees: >> 191 (25.37 per cent) were male and 562 (74.63 per cent) were female, and >> 601 (79.81 per cent) were ongoing employees and 152 (20.19 per cent) were non-ongoing employees.

The following tables show staff statistics by location, gender, full-time and part-time status, and ongoing and non-ongoing.

Table 8.3 Staff by location

Level ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total APS 1 1 1

APS 2 1 1 17 10 4 18 51

APS 3 6 9 67 3 34 14 7 35 175

APS 4 5 10 60 1 33 12 4 36 1 162

APS 5 3 23 43 2 22 8 5 28 1 135

APS 6 4 26 7 2 2 3 44

EL 1 6 29 31 1 17 7 6 23 120

EL 2 2 7 22 12 4 2 10 59

SES 1 1 1 1 1 4

SES 2 2 2

Total 27 108 249 7 131 51 24 154 2 753

Note: Actual occupancy at 30 June 2016 includes full and part-time staff with the exception of judicial officers and casual employees. All figures are based on actual headcount.

Legend SES – Senior Executive Officer NSO – National Support Office

200 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Table 8.4 Staff by gender

Level Gender ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total APS 1 Male 1 1

APS 2 Female 1 1 13 7 4 12 38 APPENDIXES Male 4 3 6 13

APS 3 Female 4 7 49 2 24 7 6 24 123

Male 2 2 18 1 10 7 1 11 52

APS 4 Female 4 8 50 1 26 10 4 29 132

Male 1 2 10 7 2 7 1 30

APS 5 Female 3 18 36 2 20 8 4 23 1 115

Male 5 7 2 1 5 20

APS 6 Female 4 15 6 2 2 3 32

Male 11 1 12

EL 1 Female 4 4 25 1 17 5 6 19 81

Male 2 25 6 2 4 39

EL 2 Female 2 3 15 6 3 1 8 38

Male 4 7 6 1 1 2 21

SES 1 Female 1 1 2

Male 1 1 2

SES 2 Female 1 1

Male 1 1

Total 27 108 249 7 131 51 24 154 2 753

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 201 8

Table 8.5 Staff by attendance status

Level Attendance ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total APS 1 Full-time

Part-time 1 1 APPENDIXES APS 2 Full-time 1 1 11 9 3 14 39

Part-time 6 1 1 4 12

APS 3 Full-time 6 7 46 3 25 13 4 25 129

Part-time 2 21 9 1 3 10 46

APS 4 Full-time 5 8 51 1 31 9 3 30 1 139

Part-time 2 9 2 3 1 6 23

APS 5 Full-time 3 20 37 2 20 8 5 24 1 120

Part-time 3 6 2 4 15

APS 6 Full-time 2 22 7 2 2 3 38

Part-time 2 4 6

EL 1 Full-time 4 27 19 1 13 4 2 14 84

Part-time 2 2 12 4 3 4 9 36

EL 2 Full-time 2 7 15 10 3 1 8 46

Part-time 7 2 1 1 2 13

SES 1 Full-time 1 1 1 1 4

SES 2 Full-time 2 2

Total 27 108 249 7 131 51 24 154 2 753

Note: Judicial officers and the Chief Executive Officer, who are holders of public office, and casual employees are not included in the above tables.

202 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Table 8.6 Ongoing staff by location and classification

Level ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total APS 1 1 1

APS 2 1 14 6 4 15 40 APPENDIXES APS 3 3 7 55 3 30 13 4 29 144

APS 4 3 8 33 1 18 8 2 19 1 93

APS 5 2 22 35 2 19 8 5 21 1 115

APS 6 4 25 7 2 2 2 42

EL 1 5 26 30 1 14 6 5 18 105

EL 2 2 7 20 11 4 2 10 56

SES 1 1 1 1 3

SES 2 2 2

Total 19 98 196 7 101 45 18 115 2 601

Table 8.7 Non-ongoing staff by location and classification

Level ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total APS 2 1 3 4 3 11

APS 3 3 2 12 4 1 3 6 31

APS 4 2 2 27 15 4 2 17 69

APS 5 1 1 8 3 7 20

APS 6 1 1 2

EL 1 1 3 1 3 1 1 5 15

EL 2 2 1 3

SES 1 1 1

Total 8 10 53 30 6 6 39 152

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 203 8

Table 8.8 Indigenous staff by location, gender and employment status

Employment Gender ACT NSO NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA Total Status Ongoing Female 4 1 1 1 7

APPENDIXES Male

Non-ongoing Female

Total 4 1 1 1 7

Judicial officers

At 30 June 2016, there were 35 judges, including the Chief Justice; 17 female and 18 male.

Table 8.9 Total number of judges, 30 June 2015

Location Judges New South Wales 14

Victoria 1 Chief Justice

6 Judges

Queensland 7

South Australia 3

Tasmania 1

Australian Capital Territory 1 Deputy Chief Justice

2 Judges

Total 35

204 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Workforce turnover

During 2015–16, 100 employees left the entity (33 were non-ongoing, 67 were ongoing employees), being an annual turnover rate of 13.28 per cent against total employee numbers (753) at 30 June 2016.

Table 8.10 Workforce turnover APPENDIXES

Employment Type Reason Total Non-ongoing employees – 4.38% Resignation 32

Dismissed 1

Total non-ongoing employees 33

Ongoing employees – 8.90% Dismissed – Code of Conduct 2

Inter-department transfer 9

Redundancy 3

Resignation 34

Retirement age under 60 11

Retirement age 60 – 65 6

Retirement age over 65 2

Total ongoing employees 67

Total 100

Note: The above figures do not include non-ongoing employees whose actual period of engagement reached their non-ongoing contract date of expiry.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 205 8

Agreement making

Enterprise Agreement The Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014 continued to operate during 2015–16. The Agreement has a nominal expiry date of 30 June 2014, however, under present arrangements it will continue to operate after that date APPENDIXES until replaced or formally terminated.

At 30 June 2016, 733* Family Court and Federal Circuit Court employees were covered by the Enterprise Agreement.

Table 8.11 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court employees covered by the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014

Level Female Male Total APS 1 1 1

APS 2 38 13 51

APS 3 123 52 175

APS 4 132 30 162

APS 5 115 20 135

APS 6 32 12 44

EL 1 80 38 118

EL 2 37 10 47

Total 557 176 733

* Excludes casual employees

206 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Other agreements Offers of Australian Workplace Agreements (AWA) to employees ceased from 13 February 2008, in accordance with government policy; however, at 30 June 2016, 12 employees had enforceable AWAs in place. In some limited cases, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has used common law contracts and determination 24 instruments pursuant to the Australian Public Service Act 1999 APPENDIXES to build upon existing AWA arrangements.

Table 8.12 Employees covered by other agreements

Australian Workplace Common law Individual Flexibility Determination Agreements contracts Arrangements 24 arrangements

Level Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total Female Male Total

APS 1

APS 2 1 1

APS 3

APS 4

APS 5 1 1

APS 6 1 1

EL 1 1 1 1 1 6 9 15

EL 2 1 7 8 4 4 5 6 11 1 1 2

SES 1 1 1 1 2 3

SES 2 1 1 2 1 1

Total 3 9 12 2 6 8 14 15 29 1 2 3

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 207 8

Non-salary benefits

Non-salary benefits provided by the Court to employees include motor vehicles, car parking, superannuation, access to salary sacrificing arrangements, computers including home-based computer access, membership of professional associations, mobile phones, studies assistance, leave flexibilities, workplace responsibility allowances (e.g. first aid,

APPENDIXES chief and deputy chief fire warden, community language) and airline club memberships.

Performance pay arrangements

The Court’s industrial instruments do not include provision for performance based pay to employees. No employees received performance pay during 2015–16.

Table 8.13 AWA minimum and maximum salary ranges by classification

Classification Salary Range ($) APS 2 59,311 – 59,311

APS 3 N/A

APS 4 N/A

APS 5 84,754 – 84,754

APS 6 89,217 – 89,217

EL 1 102,137 – 130,000

EL 2 131,082 – 188,665

SES 1 175,434 – 209,650

SES 2 211,851 – 215,237

208 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Table 8.14 Classification structure and pay rates in accordance with the Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–2014*

APS classification Salary rates on 1 July 2012 Salary rates on 1 July 2013 APS 1 $42,779 $44,063

$43,937 $45,256 APPENDIXES

$45,745 $47,118

APS 2 $46,841 $48,247

$49,395 $50,877

$51,945 $53,504

APS 3 $54,740 $56,383

$56,129 $57,813

$57,583 $59,310

APS 4 $61,356 $63,197

$62,950 $64,839

$64,562 $66,499

APS 5 $66,325 $68,315

$68,404 $70,457

$70,330 $72,440

APS 6 $72,036 $74,198

$75,867 $78,144

$82,285 $84,754

EL 1 $91,831 $94,586

$95,497 $98,362

$99,161 $102,136

EL 2 $108,424 $111,677

$111,736 $115,089

$120,081 $123,684

$121,079 $125,639

$124,095 $127,818

$127,264 $131,082

* Excludes casual employees

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 209 8

APPENDIX FOUR

Work health and safety

Maintaining the health and safety of staff and all those who use the Court’s premises is APPENDIXES integral to the values and business of the Court. The Court is committed to: >> a continuous improvement approach to comply with the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 and the Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988 >> providing and maintaining a healthy and safe workplace >> preventing injuries by managing risk, including identifying and mitigating workplace hazards to health and safety >> developing strategies aimed at preventing work-related injury and illness >> promoting awareness and understanding of work health and safety within the Court >> fostering a cooperative relationship between the Court and its workers which provides for constructive consultation on health, wellbeing, safety and welfare at work, and >> monitoring and evaluating work health and safety performance to assess the effectiveness of the measures taken.

During 2015–16, the Court continued to work to achieve this through: >> promoting the importance of health, safety and wellbeing through encouraging discussions at team meetings >> actively preventing work-related injury and illness via regular workplace checks and inspections >> providing access to information, training, professional support and advice on workplace health and safety issues, via the Court’s intranet, training programs, e-learning and induction >> consulting with staff and their representatives on the ongoing review of the Work Health and Safety Management Plan, the Rehabilitation Management System and the Work Health and Safety Strategic Plan 2014–2016 >> advising managers and staff of their health and safety responsibilities, and >> ensuring health and safety representatives have the time and resources to reasonably perform their roles.

210 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

The Court recognises that effective health and safety management reduces the social and financial costs of work-related injury and illness. Specific initiatives taken by the Court during 2015–16 to ensure the health, safety and welfare of staff included: >> developing and implementing the Court’s comprehensive Work Health and Safety Management Plan

>> continued implementation and review of the Rehabilitation Management System APPENDIXES >> continued implementation of the Court’s Work Health and Safety Strategic Plan 2014–2016 >> drafting Work Health and Safety Risk Assessment Guidelines >> developing Due Diligence training for staff of the Court >> reviewing reporting processes which included the implementation of a new Hazard Notification and Report Form >> advising all management and staff of their legislated obligations, accountability, consultative requirements, communication and leadership responsibilities in relation to health and safety >> providing all registry and business unit managers with resources for early intervention including roles and responsibilities, and >> continued monitoring of national issues and trends through the National Work Health and Safety Committee.

Ongoing wellbeing initiatives included: >> National Work Health and Safety Committee – meetings held twice a year >> re-establishment of the Health and Safety Representative Network and the First Aid Officer Network – meetings are held twice a year, providing members with the opportunity to network and access tools and information online and support from the human resources team >> providing regular health and safety updates through the quarterly HR Newsletter >> employees have access to ergonomic assessments of workstations, ergonomic furniture, a free employee assistance program, annual influenza vaccinations, peer support officers, first aid officers and harassment contact officers >> the local health and safety committees continued to meet throughout 2015–16 and no locations reported health and safety audits requiring serious investigations during the year, and >> re-launch of the peer support network, with nine people attending specialist counselling training.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 211 8

Workers’ compensation and early intervention management

Consistent with the Court’s continuous improvement approach, there was a decrease in the Court’s workers compensation premium again this year. The Rehabilitation Management System (RMS) outlines the Court’s approach to wellbeing and rehabilitation, through identifying suitable approaches for effectively managing the APPENDIXES incidence and severity of work-related injury/illness and to assist employees to return to work following an absence. As the RMS has now been in place for two years, RSM Bird was engaged to undertake a full internal audit of the system against Comcare’s audit framework. All recommendations are currently being implemented, with the RMS identified as being a robust and transparent approach. The Court continues to proactively manage its workers compensation cases and early intervention, which has further contributed to reducing the total future costs of all claims.

212 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

APPENDIX FIVE

Advertising and market research

Under sections 311A of the Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918, the courts are required to disclose particulars of payments of $12,700 or more (inclusive of GST) for advertising, APPENDIXES market research, polling organisations, direct mail and media advertising. The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court spent a total of $39,389 (GST inclusive) during the 2015–16 financial year in advertising and market research, comprising mainly payments to media advertising organisations for recruitment notices, with $27,039 (GST inclusive) paid to Dentsu Mitchell for recruitment advertising. During 2015–16, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court did not conduct any market research or advertising campaigns.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 213 8

APPENDIX SIX

Ecologically sustainable development and environmental performance

The following information is provided in accordance with Section 516A of the Environment APPENDIXES Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act 1999.

Court activities and ecologically sustainable development As noted in its Environmental Policy, the Court: “…recognises the importance of implementing sound environmental practices in all court functions…” This overarching commitment to ecologically sustainable development (ESD) was implemented in a number of ways by the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court during 2015–16.

Impacts on the environment The Court impacts on the environment in a number of areas, primarily in the consumption of resources. Table 8.15 lists environmental impact/usage data where available (noting data is for Family Court and Federal Circuit Court).

Table 8.15 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court environmental impact/usage data, 2012–13 to 2015–16

2012–13 2013–14 2014–15 2015–16 Energy usage privately 6490 GJ 6237 GJ 5383 GJ Data not leased sites (stationary) (Giga joules) available until October 2016

Transport vehicles— 6100* GJ 6035 GJ 5871 GJ 6002 GJ energy usage

Transport flights 3,101,516 kms 3,461,665 kms 2,843,969 kms 3,829,5970 kms (estimated)

860 tonnes 962 tonnes 783** tonnes Emissions

CO2 CO2 CO2 report unavailable from new travel provider

Paper usage 27,181 reams 23,964 reams 30,385 reams 33,872 reams (office paper)

* this figure was originally reported as 6035 GJ. The correct figure is listed above. ** this figure does not include the emissions for 45,830 kms travelled under a new travel booking provider for the courts which commenced operation in May 2015 (emission figures not available at this time).

214 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Measures to minimise the court’s environmental impact

Environmental Management System The Court’s Environmental Management System (EMS) has many of the key elements now in place.

This includes: APPENDIXES >> an environmental policy outlining the Court’s broad commitment to environmental management >> an environmental risk register identifying significant environmental aspects and impacts for the Court and treatment strategies to mitigate them >> an environmental legal register to identify any relevant environmental legal requirements for the Court (this register also includes other requirements such as applicable Australian Government policy requirements) >> an EMS manual outlining procedures for each element of the EMS, as well as summary information on each element, and >> a range of forms to accompany the EMS elements as required.

Other measures

During 2015–16, the Court worked within its EMS to minimise its environmental impact through a number of specific measures, either new or continuing.

Energy >> as noted in Table 8.15 the 2015–16 data is not available until October 2016 >> electricity contracts continued to be reviewed to ensure value for money. Energy supply contracts negotiated in recent years resulted in estimated savings of $15,000, and >> ongoing staff education to reduce energy use where possible, such as shutting down desktops and switching off lights and other electrical equipment when not in use.

Information technology >> in addition to the desktop auto shutdown program that commences at 7pm, staff continued to be encouraged to shut down their desktops as they leave work to maximise energy savings >> e-waste was recycled or reused where possible, including auctioning redundant but still operational equipment, and >> ensuring fully recyclable packaging where possible.

Paper >> most facsimile machines are set to email to reduce printing costs >> affidavits of 100 pages or more are no longer printed >> one sided paper was reused for notepaper in some registries

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 215 8

>> clients were encouraged to use the online Portal system, and staff were encouraged to send emails rather than letters where feasible >> secure paper (confidential etc.) continued to be shredded and recycled for all court locations >> non-secure paper recycling was available at 19 sites, and >> most printers are set to default double sided printing and monochrome. APPENDIXES

Waste/cleaning >> cleaning contracts for the Commonwealth Law Courts (via the Department of Finance who act as the lessor) and the majority of the privately leased sites came into effect in 2014. Provision for waste commingled recycling (such as non-secure paper, cardboard, recyclable plastics, metals and glass) forms a part of both contracts, with regular waste reporting included in the contract requirements for the privately leased sites >> printer toner cartridges continued to be recycled at the majority of sites >> recycling facilities for staff personal mobiles were permanently available at 11 sites >> electronic media (CDs, work mobiles etc.) continued to be securely shredded and components recycled where possible >> as noted previously, secure paper recycling was available at all sites, and >> fluorescent light globes continued to be recycled for all sites.

Corporate culture/communication >> the Environmental Champions Network (ECN) continued to offer the opportunity for staff to provide input about environmental matters for the courts. The volunteer membership comprises 17 members representing 13 sites nationally. Projects in 2015–16 included: −− Earth Hour −− a national ‘Transport Challenge’, where staff earned points for walking, riding etc. or using public transport to go to and from work over a two week period, as well as for exercising (as an points option encouraging healthy behaviour for those who could not use alternative transport) −− Christmas electronic equipment shutdown drive −− ECN internal online national ‘community’ for interactive communication between members, and −− an environmental management intranet page provided information on environmental issues for the courts >> regular articles about the courts’ environmental status were included in the national internal eNewsletter Courts Exchange, and >> a court-specific ‘envirosmart’ logo was used as branding when promoting environmental initiatives.

216 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Property Fitouts and refurbishments continued to be conducted in an environmentally responsible manner including: >> recycling demolished materials where possible >> maximising reuse of existing furniture and fittings APPENDIXES >> engaging consultants with experience in sustainable development where possible and including environmental performance requirements in relevant contracts >> maximising the use of environmentally friendly products such as recycled content in furniture and fittings, low VOC (volatile organic compounds) paint and adhesives, and energy efficient appliances, lighting and air conditioning, and >> installing water efficient appliances.

Travel Whilst some travel is unavoidable, staff are encouraged to consider alternatives if possible, including using videoconferencing facilities.

Review and improvement strategies

As is noted in its Environmental Policy under the EMS, the Court is committed to ‘continual improvement in environmental performance’. Reviews are periodically conducted of environmental impacts and improvement strategies. In 2015–16 the Court: >> reviewed its environmental risk register (significant environmental aspects and impacts), and >> collected and reported relevant energy use data under the Energy Efficiency in Government Operations Policy.

Additional ESD implications

In 2015–16, the Court did not administer any legislation with ESD implications, nor did it have outcomes specified in an Appropriations Act with ESD implications.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 217 8

APPENDIX SEVEN

Grant programs

The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court made no grant payments during 2015–16. APPENDIXES

218 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

APPENDIX EIGHT

Committees

Judicial committees, 30 June 2016 APPENDIXES

Committee Terms of reference Court Policy Committee >> To support the Chief Justice in the governance of the Court and to provide advice on strategy and the Chief Justice Bryant (Chair) future direction of the Court.

Standing Committee Terms of reference

Finance >> To provide judicial input to the Court’s annual budget in relation to the funding and resourcing of judicial Justice Berman (Chair) work, including the national calendar for interstate −−Budgeting judicial travel. −−Judicial remuneration −−Audit and risk

Rules >> To consider all necessary or proposed rule changes. Section 123 of the Family Law Act 1975 provides Justice Ryan (Chair) that a majority of judges may make rules of court in Justice Rees (Chair) relation to practices and procedures to be followed from February 2016 in the Family Court.

Court Performance >> To ensure the implementation and maintenance of case management systems designed to achieve maximum Justice Austin (Chair) efficiency in the discharge of the Court’s work. −−Case management −−Magellan

Court Services >> To oversee and report on the provision of services to the public, including the equitable delivery of access Justice Forrest (Chair) to justice, mindful of barriers created by the cost −−Cultural diversity of litigation, race, religious, cultural and language −−Unrepresented litigants diversity, family violence and physical and mental health disabilities. −−Property management −−Library >> The provision of services to judges and staff. −−Family violence >> The Court’s maintenance and storage of its records. −−Children’s −−IT judicial requirements

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 219 8

Standing Committee Terms of reference Professional Development >> To develop, implement and oversee the ongoing and Judicial Welfare judicial education in the Family Court, including orientation for new appointments, the formulation Justice Ainslie-Wallace (Chair) of a comprehensive plan for judicial education and

APPENDIXES Professional development the annual Judicial Education Conference. programs including: >> To put in place and monitor programs which assist −−Orientation judges to maintain resilience as judges. −−Judicial welfare >> To oversee the research and ethics committee. −−Research and ethics

Senior management committees, 30 June 2016

Title Chair Members Terms of reference Chief Executive Chief Executive >> Executive Director, To provide operational Officer’s Officer Corporate and policy advice to Management Family Court (Adrian Brocklehurst) the Chief Executive Advisory Group and Federal Officer regarding key >> Executive Officer, Circuit Court areas that are likely Family Court (Richard Foster) to be affected by the (Leisha Lister) integration of the >> Executive Director administrations of the Operations, Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court Federal Circuit Court (Steve Agnew) >> Principal Registrar, Family Court (Angela Filippello) >> Principal, Child Dispute Services (Jane Reynolds) >> Principal Registrar, Federal Circuit Court (Adele Byrne) >> Regional Registry Managers >> Director of Administration, Federal Circuit Court (Stewart Fenwick) >> Chief Information Officer (Paul Stace)

220 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Title Chair Members Terms of reference Audit and Risk Brian Acworth Members Monitor and where Committee (external necessary recommend >> Maria Storti member) improvements to: (external member) >> Risk management >> Simon Kelso APPENDIXES identification (Regional Registry and amelioration Manager ACT/NSW) >> Internal control Observers processes >> Adrian Brocklehurst (including fraud (Executive Director control) Corporate and CFO) >> The financial >> ANAO representatives reporting process (including KPMG) >> The functioning >> RSM Bird Cameron of the internal representatives audit unit >> RSM Bird Cameron >> The external also provide secretariat audit process services >> Processes for monitoring compliance with legislation, regulations and government policy

Maintain an effective working relationship with the ANAO

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 221 8

Title Chair Members Terms of reference National Chief Executive Members are selected Consultative forum Consultative Officer’s by vote and represent: for staff about issues Committee representative – with a national >> Associates Director, perspective, such as (Bernadette Henderson) APPENDIXES Human Resources industrial democracy, (Claire Golding) >> Client Services – security, the strategic major registries objectives of the courts, (Chris Cole) equal employment opportunities, >> Client Services – new technology, regional registries accommodation (Kevin Jenkins) and amenities, >> National Enquiry and personnel and Centre (Phillip Garrard) staffing policies and >> Registrars practices (Dinh Tran) Delegates present >> National Support staff views on issues Office (Matt Asquith) that affect the management and >> Secretariat future direction (Jane Morgan) of the courts and >> A representative from provide feedback the Community and and briefings to the Public Sector Union is workplace nationally also invited to attend

222 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Title Chair Members Terms of reference Work Health Director Human >> Executive Director, and Safety Resources Corporate Services (Claire Golding) (Adrian Brocklehurst) >> National Property APPENDIXES Manager (Akasha Atkinson) >> Health and Safety representative (Brian Hartley) >> First Aid Officer (Bernadette Henderson) >> Director Human Resources – Chair (Claire Golding) >> Registry Manager (Greg Johannesen) >> Workforce and Policy Manager (Jane Morgan) >> HR Coordinator – Secretariat (Jaime Simons) >> Director Procurement and Risk (Patrick Lamb) >> Case Manager and Wellbeing Adviser (Sharon Briggs)

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 223 8

APPENDIX NINE

External involvement

The Family Court has a number of strategies for strengthening its partnerships with clients and APPENDIXES other stakeholders within the family law system, such as legal practitioners, non-government organisations and government agencies and departments. External stakeholders at the strategic level influence, either directly or indirectly, the direction of the family law system within Australia. They include: >> the Attorney-General’s Department >> other government departments and agencies >> child welfare authorities >> the Department of Human Services >> legal services commissions and community legal centres >> law societies and the Law Council of Australia >> community-based and non-government organisations, and >> the Australian Federal Police.

Relationships with these groups are managed either by the Chief Justice, the Deputy Chief Justice, other judges on behalf of the Chief Justice, the Chief Executive Officer and/or other senior executives. There are a number of established channels through which external stakeholders may inform the Court and affect its processes and client service delivery, including the following.

Family Law Council The Family Law Council, established by the Attorney-General under section 115 of the Family Law Act 1975, confers with the Court in the course of its consideration of particular aspects of family law. The Court has judges appointed to the council and senior executives as observers at its meetings.

Australian Institute of Family Studies The Australian Institute of Family Studies was established under section 114B of the Family Law Act and is a forum for exchange of information and research.

Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia The Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice meet quarterly with the Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia. There are regular liaison meetings between the state law societies and bar associations and each of the Court’s registries.

224 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Family Law Forum The Chief Justice chairs the national Family Law Forum, which consists of representatives from the Family Court, Federal Circuit Court, the Family Law Council, the Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia, National Legal Aid, the Attorney-General’s Department, the Department of Social Services, Child Support, the Australian Institute of Family Studies, non-government organisations and community legal centres. APPENDIXES In addition to the Family Law Forum, a number of external stakeholders contribute to court direction by contributing to or being members of various court committees, for example, as members of the Court’s Magellan Committee, the Audit and Risk Committee and the Family Law Advisory Group. For more information on court committees, see Appendix eight.

Local registry consultations and other activities for improved service delivery

Ongoing engagement with local community-based organisations, community forums, law societies, family law pathway networks, volunteer networks and other government agencies, including many at the state level, was a priority of registries in 2015–16. Local pathways groups or networks continued to be a key forum for engagement. Pathways is a family law interagency network, established in 2005 and funded by the Federal Attorney-General’s Department. It facilitates a more integrated family law system, to include lawyers and community-based agencies that deal with separated families, family dispute resolution and associated issues such as family violence. Each network develops and maintains cross-sector training to help build stronger working relationships in the family law system. Regular consultation also provides feedback about users’ experiences of registry services and the courts. This leads to service improvements and ensures that the courts are better placed to make effective referrals to community-based services for clients who may require ongoing support. In addition to general consultations, registries engaged with community-based organisations and other jurisdictions about best practice approaches to support those clients who are subject to, or fear, violence from their partner, former partner or other family members. Some of the regional highlights during the year follow:

New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory

Sydney and Wollongong >> Judges participated in a forum with the legal profession to engage lawyers around issues relating to judicial duty lists and interim hearings. Other meetings with representatives of the law society, bar association and legal aid were held throughout the year. >> Registry management team members attended the regular forum with NSW Legal Aid to discuss issues impacting legal aid and the courts. >> Sydney registry hosted meetings of the Unrepresented Litigants Working Party, chaired by Justice Le Poer Trench and Judge Baumann, which included representatives from child welfare agencies, the Family Law Section of the Law Council, legal aid, the Attorney-General’s Department and the legal profession. The working party continues to address a series of issues that confront unrepresented litigants and their experiences with the courts.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 225 8

>> Sydney registry hosted the annual meeting of the NSW Magellan Steering Committee which is chaired by Justice Cleary. The committee includes judges from Sydney, Newcastle and Parramatta and representatives from the NSW Police, NSW Department of Family and Community Services and legal aid and provides direction on the management of Magellan cases in NSW. >> Registrars hosted a meeting with the NSW Law Society and representatives of the legal APPENDIXES profession to further develop the partnership with the Family Law Settlement Service (FLSS). >> The Women’s Family Law Support Service continues to provide valuable support to women attending court in the Sydney registry. The service is provided by the Marrickville Women’s Refuge and the liaison officer is in regular contact with staff to provide support and assistance. >> Sydney registry participated in the Greater Sydney Family Law Pathways Network (FLPN) including community-based organisations and family relationship centres (FRC). >> Continuing Legal Education seminars were held approximately every two months for members of the legal profession. >> Sydney registry hosted work experience students and provided supervision to law students. >> Portal information sessions were conducted and training sessions for lawyers were held in Sydney and Wollongong. >> Other key collaborative engagements in the Sydney registry in 2015–16 include: −− Legal Aid Family Law Duty Service −− Legal Aid Court Ordered Mediation Program −− Information and Referral Service (provided by the Sydney City FRC), and −− Women’s Family Law Support Service. >> Sydney registry hosted judges and foreign delegates including: −− a contingent of judges from Asia that attended the Commonwealth and Common Law International Family Justice Conference in late 2015 −− a delegation from Vanuatu including the Chief Registrar, Vanuatu Courts and representatives from the Island Courts, Supreme Court and Magistrates Court, and −− Myanmar fellows undertaking a study tour of Australian courts.

Canberra >> The ceremonial farewell sitting for Deputy Chief Justice Faulks was held on 12 February 2016 pending his retirement in late 2016. The ceremonial welcome sitting for Justice Shane Gill was held on 17 May 2016. Both ceremonies attracted large crowds of practitioners from the Canberra legal community. >> The senior family consultant was awarded a Churchill Fellowship to undertake research and investigate and evaluate the use of structured assessment methodologies in family law matters and in particular, structured approaches for assessing parents and children. This will assist the courts’ future development in this area.

226 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> Canberra registry provided Portal training to practitioners and their support staff in September 2015. >> The registry manager and a judge met with students undertaking legal studies and the registry hosted visits from students competing in the Philip C Jessup International Law Moot Court Competition and Bond University High School Mooting Competition.

>> The registrar and registry staff met with the two Muslim legal aid liaison officers to APPENDIXES provide information about the Court and court processes and discuss referrals. >> The registrar continued to be very proactive in the local community and throughout the year was involved in the following activities: −− meetings with Relationships Australia to discuss family dispute resolution services −− participated in a review of the ACT FLPN −− met with a visiting court officer from Japan to discuss family violence in the Family Court system −− met with the coordinator of the ACT FLPN −− meetings with the Office for Children, Youth and Family Support about exchange of information for family law matters −− met with ACT government representatives to discuss the domestic violence policy gap analysis −− met with the Executive Director of the Women’s Legal Centre to discuss family violence initiatives −− met with the Family Law Committee to discuss listing arrangements for the duty list and various matters −− attended the 2016 ACT Women’s Awards Ceremony honouring women who have made an outstanding contribution to improving the status and lives of women and girls in the community −− regular liaison with the Chair of the Family Law Committee about relevant recent changes in legislation and/or procedure −− liaison with the ACT Legal Aid about matters which may affect delivery of their duty lawyer service and/or their client group −− chaired the ACT Legal Aid Independent Children’s Lawyer (ICL) Advisory Committee, interviewing candidates for the ICL panel, and −− attended a workshop Domestic Violence: The Legal Services Challenge, run by the Business and Industry Engagement on Domestic Violence Project. >> The senior family consultant presented at a domestic violence conference hosted by ACT FLPN. >> The family consultant joined the ACT FLPN steering committee and was invited to be a panel member representing the Court for Family Law and Child Protection: collaboration or confusion.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 227 8

Parramatta >> The NSW Legal Aid Early Intervention Unit duty solicitor scheme continued, with two or three full-time solicitor’s onsite. Services are delivered to increase access to earlier, expert legal assistance for unrepresented individuals seeking legal help; assist clients to take timely and appropriate action to progress or resolve their family law matters efficiently and effectively; and improve the efficiency of the courts by reducing the APPENDIXES impact of unrepresented litigants on the workload of registry staff and the Court process. Significant numbers of clients seen by the duty solicitors for the first time were referred to services such as FRCs, resulting in reduced filings of inappropriate court applications. These would otherwise have been listed before a judicial officer, resulting in time being spent on a matter where a non-litigious pathway was more appropriate. >> The NSW Legal Aid Court Ordered Mediation Program (COMP), which began as a pilot at Parramatta registry in 2011, continues to operate with one permanent full-time equivalent legal aid mediator onsite. Parties in children’s matters may be referred (or ordered) to COMP at any stage of the litigation process if there is a connection to NSW Legal Aid (i.e. at least one party has legal aid funding or if an independent children’s lawyer has been appointed in the matter). COMP has resulted in full or partial settlement for a majority of matters, saving a significant number of court days and legal aid funded days. >> NSW Legal Aid facilitated a mediation placement for one registrar, as part of a Graduate Diploma Family Dispute Resolution with the Institute of Family Practice. This permitted the registrar to work with mediation services provided outside the Court. >> A pilot commenced in January 2015 providing for the Aboriginal Legal Service (ALS) to provide a duty solicitor service at the Court from 9am to 1pm for parenting matters, with solicitors remaining at the Court after these hours should client service delivery require it. The ALS offers access to culturally appropriate early intervention assistance, expert advice and court representation in family law matters. The ALS represents and advises unrepresented Aboriginal clients in proceedings before the courts. The ALS adopts a unique service delivery model that is specific to the ALS, with solicitors working with Aboriginal field officers. The ALS duty service provides Aboriginal clients access to professional and proficient legal representation. >> Liaison with the local legal profession continued. The Family Court case management judge, the Federal Circuit Court coordinating judge, other judicial officers, and the registry management team, communicated regularly with the Western Sydney legal profession. This liaison extended to the provision of instruction in the use of the Portal. >> The FLSS is a joint initiative of the courts, the NSW Bar Association and the Law Society of NSW. FLSS assists with financial/property matters, usually at the post-conciliation conference and pre-final hearing stage of proceedings. The NSW Law Society met with Parramatta judicial officers and the Parramatta legal profession to explain the FLSS process. The FLSS settlement rate has also positively contributed to a material saving of court days. >> Registrars and family consultants attended a Greater Sydney FLPN education and networking event at which the keynote speaker addressed the issues of family violence and trauma and how they impact children and families. >> The senior family consultant attended steering group meetings and local interagency events held by Greater Sydney FLPN.

228 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> A judge and family consultant presented at a Parramatta Region Family Law Interagency (part of the Greater Sydney FLPN) event on the recognition of Aboriginal culture within the Family Law Act. >> The registry manager spoke at a Parramatta region family law interagency event on safety protocols at court.

>> A judge, registrar, family consultant and the registry manager were involved as presenters APPENDIXES in a forum involving Aboriginal services, the courts and the NSW Department of Family and Community Services. >> The senior family consultant continued to facilitate FRC attendance at court, as part of FRC training and familiarisation. >> The registry manager, in collaboration with a Western Sydney University Adjunct Professor (former Family Court Judge), continued to provide a significant number of briefings to Western Sydney secondary schools, local TAFE and Western Sydney University students. >> Child Dispute Services provided a three-month supervised placement for a fourth year social work student from Monash University. The placement involved a research task involving a literature review on the topic of The applicability of Trauma-Informed and Child-Focussed Practice to Family Consultant Interventions. >> A registrar spoke at a family law conference on the drafting of Consent Orders. >> The registry manager spoke at an AIJA conference on strategies to mitigate risk of violence in the courts. >> A registrar, whose first language is Vietnamese, was guest speaker at a NSW Vietnamese Women’s Association information session on Legal Matters relating to seniors (part of the ‘Vietnamese Senior – Happy and Well for Life’ project funded by Fairfield Club Grants). >> Parramatta registry hosted the following foreign delegations: −− a visiting Japanese judge looking at different aspects of the courts/registry −− a Japanese senior court administrator −− Malaysian Legal Aid, and −− the Republic of Korea, Child Support Agency. >> The NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal continued to deliver some of its conciliation and hearing services from Parramatta registry, using one courtroom on a full-time basis, plus another courtroom as required.

Dubbo >> The family consultant is the immediate past chair – and current member – of the NSW Central West FLPN. This group provides a bi-monthly forum for family law professionals in the NSW Central West region, with the forum being held via video-link between Dubbo and Bathurst. >> Circuiting judges to Dubbo registry (from Parramatta registry) regularly spoke at the Central West lawyer continuing legal education events. >> Staff hosted two Portal instructional sessions with the Central West legal profession.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 229 8

Newcastle >> Child Dispute Services attended the Greater Newcastle FLPN meetings and presentations. Judges presented at a FLPN event on Indigenous issues. >> Child Dispute Services met with Interrelate staff at Port Macquarie and Centacare staff at Tamworth. APPENDIXES >> Judges and staff held quarterly meetings with members of the legal profession. >> Regular meetings were held between senior registry staff and members of the Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Association. These meetings facilitated discussion and the exchange of information on issues relevant to the registry and the legal profession. >> Judges and registrars continued to assist the Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Association with the preparation for and presentation of the annual Hunter Valley Family Law Conference. >> Regular lunchtime seminars were again held for members of the legal profession, with judges, registrars, barristers, lawyers and special guest speakers presenting on topics such as: −− drug testing −− mediation −− registrar chambers applications −− parental responsibility −− setting aside orders −− advocacy −− dealing with untruthful litigants and evidence, and −− change of circumstances in parenting applications. >> Newcastle registry hosted visits from students from the University of Newcastle as part of their family law training program, as well as high school students conducting mock trials.

South Australia/Northern Territory >> Continued active involvement in the Child Support Stakeholder Engagement Program, Community Stakeholders Engagement Group, Pathways, FRCs and Children’s Contact Services (including regional contact centres). >> Guided tours for professionals working in the family law system for a ‘lived experience’ of what it is like for clients to go to the Family Court. The tours included: −− the Court building and its services −− filing an application at the Court registry −− seeing a courtroom −− watching the Court hold hearings, and −− visiting the SA Family Law Pathways Kiosk and Mediation Section of the courts.

230 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> Visits to the Legal Services Commission, allowing staff the opportunity to meet with Commission staff and familiarise themselves with the operations of the Legal Services Commission. >> Information sessions to law students from the University of South Australia and the Adelaide University. Students also visited the registry as part of the universities’ family law training programs. APPENDIXES >> Involvement in the South Australian Police call centre staff training. The registry provided call centre participants with information in relation to the work of the courts and where to refer clients for advice. >> Attending and offering support to the South Australian Government’s High Tech Challenge which is developing IT programs in relation to the prevention of violence against women. >> Conducted cultural awareness training. In conjunction with a local interpreter and translation company, staff had the opportunity to gain a better understanding of working with interpreters and the barriers experienced with language and cultural differences for CALD clients working with the Court system. >> Hosted a video-link from the Western Australian State Courts on the Western Australian Integrated Court Management System (ICMS) with invites extended across court jurisdictions in South Australia. >> Facilitated the South Australian biannual Pathways CEO briefing. >> Participated in the South Australian Living Arts festival. In conjunction with the Federal Court, the Adelaide registry co-hosted an Indigenous art exhibition presented by Seymour College. This exhibition created a learning environment for students and the wider community by presenting traditional and contemporary artworks by Indigenous peoples. >> Initiated an electronic database as a communication tool for the South Australian Magistrates Court in relation to obtaining copies of Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Orders in relation to children when an Intervention Order action is underway in the state jurisdiction. >> With Adelaide identified as the host city for NAIDOC Week 2015, the registry coordinated an event that consisted of lunch being supplied by an Aboriginal catering company, a smoking ceremony, traditional dance and a presentation from an Aboriginal elder in relation to the input from the local community into the design of our Circle Court.

Queensland >> Consultation with State Magistrates Court colleagues occurred in July and August 2015 regarding the development and implementation of a referral system for urgent matters from Brisbane Magistrates Domestic Violence Court to the Brisbane registry. >> Court tours and presentations to staff of various local Relationships Australia offices occurred throughout the year. >> Continuing collaboration occurred with the State Magistrates Court in maximising the use of the Justice of the Peace (JP) service to the community through the respective courts. Presentations were conducted by Brisbane staff to volunteer JPs on 15 July 2015, 26 February 2016 and 19 May 2016. The presentations focused on the requirements for witnessing family law documents.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 231 8

>> Meetings between the courts, Legal Aid Queensland and the Queensland Department of Justice and Attorney-Generals were held to discuss the implementation of information exchange between the specialist domestic violence court pilot in Southport Magistrates Court and the Brisbane registry. >> Meetings were held in October 2015 with local representatives of firms on the Interpreters and Translation Services Panel, following the signing of new Deeds of Understanding with APPENDIXES the courts. >> A Court tour and presentation to members of Gold Coast FLPN was held in October 2015. >> Registry staff organised and conducted mock hearings for the Queensland University of Technology Bar Practice course. >> Staff participated in the Child Support Stakeholders Engagement Group meeting conducted by the Department of Human Services. >> Ongoing consultation with Crown Law and the Queensland Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services regarding the production of redacted subpoena material in court proceedings. >> Staff participated at the Annual Family Law Duty Lawyers stakeholders meeting in November 2015. >> A meeting was held between Uniting Care post separation service providers and courts’ Child Dispute Services area in December 2015. >> A meeting was held with legal and administrative staff of Women’s Legal Service in March 2016. >> Ongoing liaison with local family law practitioners associations and Pathways groups occurred in circuit locations of Rockhampton, Lismore and Coffs Harbour. >> Regular meetings were held with the local family law practitioners associations, Legal Aid Queensland, the Queensland Department of Communities, Child Safety and Disability Services and the Magellan Stakeholders Group. These meetings provide opportunities for information exchange and building stronger networks across the family law system.

Victoria/Tasmania

Melbourne >> Regular liaison continued with the family law section of the Law Institute of Victoria (via the monthly Court Practice Committee), the Family Law Section of the Victorian Bar and with the Victorian Legal Aid Commission (via meetings with relevant senior managers). Matters discussed included case management processes, the Court User Satisfaction Survey results, new Rules, the Court Reform Bill and any issues arising with respect to registry services and facilities such as safety, security, interviews rooms and fee payment and copying services.

232 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> The collaborative relationship between the federal family law jurisdictions and state child welfare authorities continued nationally. The initiative of a co-located child protection worker at the Melbourne and Dandenong registries was confirmed as ongoing by the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services following a positive evaluation completed by the Australian Institute of Family Studies. The vision was that working together with the dedicated focus of a specialist senior child protection practitioner

would ensure professional, sensitive and well-targeted responses to children and APPENDIXES young people who are at significant risk of harm. This work continued to be steered by a committee comprising the courts, the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services and Victoria Legal Aid. Reports from judges, the Victorian Department and the registries is that this initiative is achieving the objective of ensuring exchange of relevant and timely information so that arrangements can be made to protect children at risk. >> Justice Bennett, the President of the Children’s Court, the Deputy Chief Magistrate, Victoria Legal Aid, Victoria Police, the Australian Federal Police and the Department of Health and Human Services continued liaison with Victorian courts and agencies in the context of the Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence. Inter-court and inter-agency engagement has focussed upon the Royal Commission Recommendations with the view to improved responses to complex family cases. In particular, exchange of information concerning cases where there are family violence allegations on a more systemic and methodical basis, has been a central concern. The Regional Coordinator for Child Dispute Services has actively supported this work on behalf of the Family Court and the Federal Circuit Court together with the Registry Manager. >> Significant support of Victoria Pathways has continued, including helping with the design of events and providing a venue for those events. The Victorian Regional Coordinator for Child Dispute Services is central to this support. Major events were hosted at Melbourne registry, including a forum on Mental Illness and Children in Family Law and Engaging with Perpetrators of Family Violence. These events are well attended, including representation from judicial officers. >> International delegations from the Sri Lankan Supreme Court (judges and court administrators ) were hosted by Melbourne registry, as was a judicial officer from Israel who was interested in the Court’s approach to parenting disputes and the services provided by Child Dispute Services. >> Court Network Victoria launched its resource publication, Family Law Booklet for CALD communities (Vietnamese and Dinka), acknowledging the significant contribution of the Melbourne registry in achieving this innovative milestone. Whilst a previous publication was specifically orientated towards unrepresented litigants at the Final Hearing stage of proceedings, these recent publications are more expansive and cover the entire litigation process. Future publications are envisaged, which will expand this resource across other CALD communities.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 233 8

>> The registry supported a number of initiatives including: −− Thornbury High Indigenous Students (half day exposure to the Court) – four year 11 and 12 students participated in a tour of the registry, met with Justice Bennett and attended court proceedings −− CHUO Summer School 2016 (half day exposure to the Court) – 12 students from

APPENDIXES Japan participated in discussions with Justice Bennett, attended court proceedings and a tour of the registry −− Year 10 student placements from a number of schools where students learnt about the justice system, the work of courts and registry administration −− Victoria University Internship Program – enabling law students to observe court hearings and gain insight into the family law jurisdiction −− Asia Law Centre, University of Melbourne – in collaboration with the Law Centre, Ms Flavia Agnes (Scholar, Author and Human Rights Activist) was hosted by the Family Court to speak to invited guests from Victorian courts and representatives from the legal profession), on the subject of Women’s Rights in the context of family breakdown in India −− Through the University of Melbourne, Melbourne registry hosted a group of Australian Imams and addressed the cultural interface between these communities and the family law system. This was a most valuable exchange, which identified the mutual benefits of establishing a pathway with the Council of Imams for future consultative purposes on family law related topics.

Dandenong >> Quarterly meetings were held with the registrar and the three agencies providing free legal advice at the registry. The purpose of the meetings is to exchange information about process changes and registry practices, particularly as they relate to unrepresented litigants in order that services are continually improved. >> Several meetings were held involving senior staff of the Department of Health and Human Services – Southern region, Dandenong judges and senior registry staff. The meetings promote cooperation and facilitate the exchange of information to better protect the children involved in court disputes. An officer of the Department continues to work out of the registry one day each week. >> Quarterly meetings of community-based legal practitioners, local FRC, Victorian Family Pathways Network and other community-based dispute resolution services were held. It is a forum of service providers with a common client base, sharing information and discussing family dispute resolution issues and challenges to ensure that services are coordinated and responsive. >> Dandenong hosted a forum titled CALD and African-Australian communities within Family Law: Access and Equality from a Woman’s Perspective on 30 June 2016. The event was organised by the Victorian FLPN. A Federal Circuit Court judge was one of a panel of experts to discuss how cultural differences impact the making of court orders and what information needs to be given to the courts in order to achieve culturally appropriate responses.

234 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Tasmania >> The Tasmania Family Violence Consultative Committee forum is convened biannually and includes members of the community sector, Department of Justice (Safe at Home), Department of Health and Human Services, Tasmania Police and staff of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. The forum is convened by the Senior Family Consultant and is arranged in Hobart with video-link to Launceston. Discussions have included: the impact APPENDIXES of family violence on children and their developing brain; the Family Law Council’s interim report on the interaction of family law and child protection systems; the Safe Home, Safe Families: Tasmania’s Family Violence Action Plan 2015–2020; and the cross examination of vulnerable witnesses. >> The registrar convenes and chairs quarterly meetings between the courts, Child Protection and Legal Aid Commission Tasmania to raise new developments, discuss stakeholder concerns and review the informal protocol between the courts and Child Protection. >> The registrar delivered a lecture to family law students at the University of Tasmania Law School and family consultants have presented to the Tasmanian Young Lawyers Group. >> The Tasmanian registries actively support the southern, northern and north west family law pathways groups.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 235 8

APPENDIX TEN

Judicial activities

In addition to hearing and determining cases, the Family Court’s judges actively contribute to APPENDIXES the development of the law and legal education, both in Australia and internationally. This is achieved through attending conferences and seminars; membership of relevant bodies; presenting papers and lectures; addressing academic institutions, professional associations and community-based organisations; meeting international delegations and liaising with judicial colleagues around the world. Many judges also serve as members of organising committees for conferences, as well as working in the community with a variety of legal and non-legal organisations. A summary of conferences and seminars attended and papers delivered by the Chief Justice and Family Court judges during 2015–16, and other activities undertaken during this period, follow:

Chief Justice’s activities

Conferences attended and papers delivered

17 July 2015 Queensland Law Society’s 30th Family Law Residential. Co-presented with Her Honour Judge Mary O’Dwyer of the District and Family Court, New Zealand the Keynote Address.

23 July 2015 Presented at the Victorian Magistrates Court Professional Development Conference: Intersection of Family Law, Child Protection and Family Violence and the launch of the Family Law Manual for Magistrates.

14–15 August 2015 Opened and presented at the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts 2nd Australian Chapter meeting.

17–18 August 2015 Gave two brief papers at the UNICEF Children in Law Conference, Vietnam (one on the Family Court and how we determine the best interests of the child, and the other on medical procedures that require court authorisation).

25 August 2015 Panellist at Business and Professional Women’s event: Empowering Women in the Legal System: An Equal Pay Day Event.

12–13 September 2015 Presented a State of the Nation address at the Family Law Practitioners’ Association of Western Australia.

14–17 September 2015 Attended the Commonwealth Magistrates’ and Judges’ Association (CMJA) 17th Triennial Conference in Wellington, New Zealand.

236 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Conferences attended and papers delivered

23 September 2015 Panellist at the Law Institute of Victoria’s 2015 Family Violence Conference.

9–11 October 2015 Presented at the Judicial College of Australia Conference in Adelaide: Family Courts and family violence. APPENDIXES 23–24 October 2015 Panellist and a ‘fire-side chat’ with Members of the Family Law Bar at the South Australian Bar Association 2015 Annual Conference.

12 November 2015 Presented the Hochelaga Lecture in Hong Kong: Challenges in the Development of International Family Law: Reflections by the Chief Justice of the Family Court of Australia.

13–14 November 2015 Panellist at the 3rd Children’s Issues Forum in Hong Kong: An Evaluation of Family Law Reforms in Australia.

16–19 November 2015 Hosted and presented at the Commonwealth and Common Law Standing Conference for International Family Judges in Sydney.

21–23 January 2016 Fourth meeting on Article 13(1)(b) in The Hague, Netherlands.

21–23 February 2016 Presented at the National Judicial College of Australia’s National Judicial Orientation Program: Maintaining Psychological and Physical Health in Adelaide.

11 March 2016 Presented at the STEP Trusts Symposium in Adelaide: Unsettled Settlements.

9 April 2016 Keynote presenter at the Australian Women Lawyers 6th National Conference: A View from the Top of the Hill — A Retrospective by an Activist Woman Lawyer.

5 May 2016 Presented at the Australian Intercultural Society luncheon: Creating the Best Society for Our Children.

10 May 2016 Presented at the Court Network National Volunteer Week.

26–29 May 2016 Attended the International Association of Women Judges’ 13th Biennial Conference in Washington.

1–4 June 2016 Attended the 53rd Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ Conference in Seattle.

16 June 2016 Presented at the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration’s Improving Court Practice in Family Violence Cases Conference.

21 June 2016 Presented at the Department of Human Services National Litigation Team conference.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 237 8

In addition, the Chief Justice: >> Participated in the Victorian Bar’s Continuing Professional Development series on 14 July 2015 on Strategic Case Management: Briefing Counsel Effectively. >> Participated in an all judges’ meeting on 3 July 2015 in Sydney. >> Hosted a luncheon in Sydney on 13 August 2015 to hear Ibu Nani speak in relation to APPENDIXES the Ten Years of the PEKKA NGO supporting Women and Children’s Access to Legal Identity and Family Law in Indonesia. >> Presented at the Supreme Court of Indonesia in Jakarta on 3 September 2015 on the topic of A Better Experience for Clients: Transforming Public Services. >> Participated in a roundtable of the Royal Commission into Domestic Violence with Commissioner Neave 21 September 2015. >> Presented at the launch of Stepping Stones: Legal barriers to economic equality after family violence by Women’s Legal Service Victoria on 22 September 2015. >> Attended the Australian Academy of Law Symposium at the Supreme Court of Victoria on 8 October 2015. >> Held an Annual Judges’ conference in Melbourne on 16–17 October 2015. >> Attended the 45th Meeting of the Council of Chief Justices of Australia and New Zealand in Darwin on 21 October 2015. >> Attended an International Hague Network Judges’ Meeting on 11–12 November 2015 in Hong Kong. >> Attended the inaugural Tristan Jepson Memorial Foundation Advisory Council meeting on 25 November 2015. >> Attended the Law Institute of Victoria’s Courts and the media forum on 11 December 2015. >> Attended the Victorian Legal Aid Launch of Research brief Characteristics of respondents charged with breach of family violence intervention orders. >> Attended the launch of the Luke Batty Foundation at Government House on 2 March 2016. >> Attended the Judicial Council of Cultural Diversity’s launch of its consultation reports on 17 March 2016. >> Attended the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts’ Australian Chapter All Day Workshop Innovations in Family Law on 24 March 2016. >> Hosted a Deakin University delegation of Sri Lanka judiciary on 7 April 2016. >> Attended the ACT Law Society 31st Annual Blackburn Lecture by DCJ Faulks on 17 May 2016. >> Held regular meetings with the Family Law Section executive throughout the year. >> Attended quarterly meetings of the Council of Chief Justices of Australia and New Zealand.

The Chief Justice is a Joint Director of Studies, Program Committee, World Congress on Family Law and Children’s Rights Inc. The Chief Justice is a board member of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (AFCC) and is President of the Australian Chapter of the AFCC.

238 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

The Chief Justice is the sole patron of Australian Women Lawyers, a patron of Court Network and a patron of Gordon Care. The Chief Justice is Chair of the working group to develop a Guide to Good Practice on the Interpretation and Application of Article 13(b) of the 1980 Hague Child Abduction Convention.

Activities of judges APPENDIXES

Papers presented and conference, seminars and workshops conducted and/or attended >> 3 July 2015, Annual Judges Meeting, Sydney. >> 9–11 July 2015, Victoria Legal Aid, Independent Children’s Lawyer Training Program Conference, Melbourne: The Role and Importance of the ICL – A Judicial Perspective. >> 10–11 July 2015, Australian Advocacy Institute, Family Law Advocacy Workshop for Independent Children’s Lawyers, Perth. >> 15 July 2015, 30th Annual Family Law Residential, Gold Coast: A Review of Case Law 2014–15. >> 16 July 2015, NSW Bar readers’ dinner, Sydney. >> 18 July 2015, Queensland Law Society, Family Law Residential, Gold Coast: Self represented litigants –Practical Implications and Solutions; The Great Debate; Special Medical Procedure cases; and Pleadings without Pleadings. >> 20 July 2015, Briefing at Victoria Legal Aid, Melbourne: Outcome of Family Law Legal Aid Services Review. >> 29 July 2015, Family Violence and Separated Parents: New Empirical Insights, Dr Rae Kaspiew. >> 1 August 2015, 25th Hunter Valley Family Law Annual Conference, Hunter Valley: A Review of Case Law 2014–15; Mental Illness/Psychological Disturbance and Evidence. >> 13 August 2015, Ten Years of the PEKKA NGO Supporting Women and Children’s Access to Legal Identity and Family Law in Indonesia Luncheon. >> 13 August 2015, Judicial College of Victoria, Seminar Program, Chaired by the Hon Justice Stephen Kaye AM, Melbourne: Closing the Gap – confronting Indigenous Incarceration. >> 14–15 August 2015, Second AFCC Australian Chapter Annual Conference, Sydney: To Treat or not to Treat: Legal Responses to Transgender Young People Revisited; The child’s parents are in court, does it matter? Psychologists and Family Law. >> 17 August 2015, Asia Law Centre Seminar presented by Mr Antony Dapiran, Davis Polk, Hong Kong and Professor Jiunn-ron Yeh, Chair Professor, National Taiwan University, Melbourne: Tolerance and Rights in Asia – With Perspectives from Hong Kong and Taiwan. >> 18 August 2015, Judicial College of Victoria, Koori Twilight Series, Dean Cowie, Manager, Native Title Unit, Department of Justice and Regulation, and Barry Kenny, CEO, Gunaikurnai Land and Waters Aboriginal Corporation, Melbourne: Recognising Traditional Owner Rights. >> 22 August 2015, State Conference, Quamby Estate, Tasmania: A Wilderness of Decisions or Emerging Trends – Property Matters post-Stanford.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 239 8

>> 26 August 2015, Lecture presented by the Hon Dr Julia Gillard at the College of Law, Victoria University, Melbourne: Education and Social Justice: The Global Education Agenda and Improving Our World. >> 26 August 2015, All in the Family Networking Event, Law Institute of Victoria, Melbourne. >> 26 August 2015, Lecture presented by Susan Adams, Psychologist, at the Child Dispute

APPENDIXES Services Seminar Series, Melbourne: Traumatised Children and Family Law: Challenges, Implications and Moving Forward. >> 28–30 August 2015, Language and the Law II Conference, Darwin. >> 3 September 2015, Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity Roundtable, Melbourne: Improving Access to Justice for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women. >> 3 September 2015, Keynote address, National Children’s and Youth Law Centre Awards and Volunteer Evening, King and Wood Mallesons, Melbourne: Children’s and Young People’s Right to Access Legal Advice and Legal Services. >> 3–4 September 2015, Towards Indigenous Democracy, 10th Annual National Indigenous Legal Conference, Melbourne. >> 6–9 September 2015, Domestic violence conference, Belfast. >> 7–11 September 2015, Mediation training for Japanese-Australian family disputes, Yokohama. >> 8 September 2015, Continuing Legal Education, Dr P Krabman, Parramatta: Distortion, Disruption, Damage and Danger – Personality Function and Dysfunction in the Context of Parental Separation. >> 8 September 2015, Family Law Council forum discussion, Justice Precinct, Parramatta. >> 8 September 2015, Queensland Child Protection Lawyers Association Annual Lecture, Brisbane. >> 9–13 September 2015, International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers Annual Conference, Taormina, Sicily. >> 22 September 2015, South Pacific Council of Youth and Children’s Court Conference, Canberra: Family Law and Child Protection Intersection ‘The Best Interests of the Child’. >> 23 September 2015, University of Queensland, Advocacy Students: Advocacy in the Appellate Jurisdiction of the Family Court of Australia. >> 25–26 September 2015, Australian Advocacy Institute, General Advocacy Skills, Sydney. >> 30 September 2015, SA Bar Readers Course, Adelaide: Session about the Family Court. >> 30 September 2015, Family Law and ADVO applications, Specialist Domestic Violence Prosecutors Course. >> 4–9 October 2015, International Bar Association, Annual Conference, Vienna, Austria: Martial arts ethics: the offensive and defensive use of the rules of professional conduct. >> 6–8 October 2015, Dialogues Conference, National Judicial College of Australia (organising committee), Adelaide.

240 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> 9–11 October 2015, Judicial College of Australia, Colloquium, Adelaide: The 800th Anniversary of Magna Carta. >> 16 October 2015, Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration, 21st Oration in Judicial Administration Lecture delivered by The Rev. Father Frank Brennan SJ AO, Professor of Law, Australian Catholic University, Melbourne: The Contours and Prospects for Indigenous Recognition in the Australian Constitution, and Why It Matters. APPENDIXES >> 16–17 October 2015, Annual Judges Conference, Melbourne. >> 19 October 2015, Family Justice Young People’s Board workshop, with Board members and establishing committee, London. >> 21–23 October 2015, HCCH and ISS Cross-Border Child Protection, Legal and Social Perspectives Conference, Geneva: International Child Abduction – Ensuring the Safe Return of the Child. >> 23 October 2015, Family Law Practitioners Association, Intensive, Advocacy, Brisbane. >> 27 October 2015, Inaugural Victorian Tristan Jepson Memorial Foundation Lecture, Keynote speaker The Hon Mary-Jane Ierodiaconou, Associate Justice, Supreme Court of Victoria, Melbourne: Inspiring Change: Creating a Healthy Workplace. >> 29–30 October 2015, National Judicial College of Australia, Leadership Conference, Sydney. >> 4 November 2015, Q and A session with local legal profession and the NSW Central West Family Law Pathways Network members, Dubbo. >> 6–7 November 2015, Australian Advocacy Institute Advocacy Workshop (Crime) NSW Legal Aid, Sydney. >> 13–14 November 2015, Children’s Issues Forum, Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. >> 13–15 November 2015, Judicial College of Victoria, Back to Country Weekend: a Weekend on Gunai Kurnai land, Gippsland region. >> 16–19 November 2015, Common Law and Commonwealth Conference, International Perspectives on Family Law Session, Sydney: Best Arrangements for Returning Children under the Abduction Convention and Otherwise; Country Reports – Australia; Concerns and Issues of Central Authorities; Judges, the Value of Judges’ Networks and Judicial Communication – What Do You Want To Know or Ask About from the Expert Panel? Best Arrangements for Returning Children under the Abduction Convention and Otherwise. >> 18 November 2015, Recovery of Child Support and Family Maintenance in Asia Pacific and Worldwide: National and Regional Systems and the Hague 2007 and Protocol Conference, Hong Kong. >> 18 November 2015, International Hague Network of Judges Meeting, Hong Kong. >> 19–20 November 2015, Justice and Society Symposium, Cranlana Program, Melbourne. >> 25 November 2015, Keynote Address, Community West Contact Centre and Victoria Legal Aid Networking Evening, Melbourne: Contact Centres and Child-focused Services.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 241 8

>> 26 November 2015, College of Law (Brisbane), Advanced Family Law Day, Brisbane: Recent Full Court cases. >> 26 November 2015, NSW Department of Family and Community Services training day: Best Interests of the Child and the Importance of Aboriginal Culture, Parramatta. >> 27 November 2015, Parenting Disputes Training Day, Victoria Legal Aid, Melbourne:

APPENDIXES A Respondent’s Perspective in Abduction Cases. >> 30 November–4 December 2015, Australian Advocacy Institute Workshop (for Securities and Futures Commission), Hong Kong. >> 11 December 2015, Queensland Law Society, Annual Specialist Accreditation presentation breakfast, Brisbane. >> 16 December 2015, Domestic Violence and Dowry Abuse workshop with Ms Flavia Agnes (Women’s Rights Lawyer and Legal Scholar, India), Melbourne. >> 21–22 January 2016, Northern Territory Law Society, Family Law Conference, Darwin: Something that caught my eye. >> 27–29 January 2016, Singapore International Conference on Court Excellence, Singapore: Courts implementation of the International Framework for Court Excellence. >> 1 February 2016, Panel presentation with the Hon Justice Bromberg, the Hon Justice James Allsop AO, Professor Gillian Triggs, and students from Skyline Foundation, County Court, Melbourne: Community Opening of the Legal Year. >> 6 February 2016, National Judicial College of Australia, Sentencing Conference, Canberra. >> 11 February 2016, Judicial College of Victoria, Koori Twilight, Chief Judge Peter Kidd, County Court of Victoria, Melbourne: Judicial Intervention: Managing Counsel. >> 12–13 February 2016, Australian Advocacy Institute, teacher training, Sydney. >> 13 February 2016, Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section, Intensive, Sydney: The latest and greatest. >> 18 February 2016, Victoria Legal Aid, Panel Presentation, Chaired by Leanne Sinclair, Family Violence Program Manager, Melbourne: Launch of Research Brief: Characteristics of Respondents Charged with Breach of Family Violence Intervention Orders. >> 19 February 2016, Launch of the NSW Legal Aid new National Independent Children’s Lawyer’s website. >> 20 February 2016, Australian Advocacy Institute Workshop (for NSW Bar), Orange. >> 21–26 February 2016, National Judicial College of Australia, Judicial Orientation Program, Glenelg. >> 26 February 2016, Department of Human Services annual conference, Sydney: Effective advocacy in court proceedings. >> 27 February 2016, Queensland Family Law Practitioners’ Conference, Cairns: Proper resourcing of the family law courts – a national priority.

242 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> 4–5 March 2016, Legal Aid Child Representation Conference, Wollongong: Crime pays: Finding and using material from associated criminal law proceedings in family law and care proceedings. >> 4–5 March 2016, Legal Aid Child Representation Conference, Wollongong: Children’s Participation – a look towards the future.

>> 4–5 March 2016, Australian Advocacy Institute Workshop for NSW Legal Aid. APPENDIXES >> 7 March 2016, Lecture by Justice Giacomo Oberto, Civil Court of Turin, Italy, Melbourne: Prenuptial Agreements in Contemplation of Divorce: European and Italian Perspectives. >> 10 March 2016, Cross Examination Round Table, Attorney-General’s Department, Melbourne. >> 10 March 2016, International Commercial Surrogacy Arrangements workshop with Child Dispute Services, Department of Health and Human Services, Department of Justice, Premier and Cabinet, Melbourne. >> 14 March 2016, Inner Temple London, Lecture, London: The Essential Requirements of Good Advocacy. >> 14 March 2016, Greater Sydney Family Law Pathways Network, Panel member, Sydney: Family Violence and Trauma – the impact on families. >> 17 March 2016, Judicial College of Victoria, Koori Twilight Series, Magistrate Ann Collins, including Tammy Anderson’s performance of I don’t want to play house, Melbourne: Family Violence. >> 18 March 2016, Queensland Law Society Symposium, Brisbane: Advanced Advocacy for Solicitors. >> 18 March 2016, NSW Young Lawyers, Continuing Legal Education. >> 19 March 2016, University of Queensland, family law students, Brisbane: Introduction to the Family Court. >> 21–23 March 2016, National Judicial College of Australia, Writing Better Judgments Program, Canberra: The first page – more than an introduction. >> 22 March 2016, NSW College of Law, Sydney: The In/Effective Use of Experts in Property Matters from a Judge’s Perspective. >> 22 March 2016, NSW Specialist Domestic Violence Course, NSW Police Force, Parramatta: Family Law. >> 22 March 2016, NSW College of Law, Family Law Autumn Intensive, Sydney: Judges Day. >> 4–5 April 2016, International Social Services, Children and Families Across Borders Conference, Melbourne: International Parental Child Abduction: The Place of the Child. >> 9 April 2016, Royal History Society of Victoria, Judging for the People: Honouring 175 Years of the Supreme Court in Victoria Conference, Melbourne: Molesworth v Molesworth. >> 14 April 2016, Family Dispute Resolution Practitioners in Legal Aid, Sydney: Therapeutic Jurisprudence in Family Law.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 243 8

>> 14 April 2016, Lecture by Ms Yoshiko Ohmachi, Family Court Probation Officer, Japan, Melbourne Law School, Melbourne: Educational Intervention in Japanese Juvenile Proceedings. >> 15 April 2016, Panel Presentation, Australian Centre for Justice Innovation, Melbourne: Humour and Alternative Dispute Resolution. >> 15–17 April 2016, Inner Temple Bar, New Practitioners Advocacy Skills Workshop, London. APPENDIXES >> 21 April 2016, Working with Children: A United Kingdom Perspective with Child Dispute Services, registry staff and Professor Judith Masson, School of Law, University of Bristol, Melbourne. >> 27–29 April 2016, Re-Unite Workshops, Leicester, United Kingdom. >> 29 April 2016, 24th annual Sir Ninian Stephen lecture, Newcastle. >> 2–5 May 2016, Fourth Malta Conference (Malta IV) on Cross-Frontier Child Protection and Family Law Conference, Malta: An Overview of the Benefits and Key Features of the Hague 1996 Convention on the International Protection of Children. >> 7 May 2016, Tasmanian Family Law Practitioners Conference, Cambridge. >> 7 May 2016, Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section, Intensive, Melbourne: The latest and greatest. >> 10 May 2015, local legal profession and the NSW Central West Family Law Pathways Network members, Dubbo: The recent case of Saintclaire [2015] FamCAFC 245 and suggestions for particularising undue influence, unconscionability and duress claims. >> 25–29 May 2016, International Association of Women Judges, Biennial Conference, Washington DC. >> 26 May 2016, Family Law Practitioners Association, young practitioners early career lawyers training, Brisbane: running a protection order matter from start to finish; evidence 101; how to stop worrying and love business valuations; the different pathways to parenthood: surrogacy and other roads less travelled. >> 27 May 2016, Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration, Challenges of Social Media for Courts and Tribunals symposium, Melbourne. >> 1 June 2016, Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Program Forum, Sydney. >> 1 June 2016, Queensland Bar Association, Junior Bar Advocacy Course, Brisbane. >> 1–4 June 2016, 53rd AFCC Annual Conference, Seattle: Global Responses to Family Violence: ‘Grave Risk’ and ‘Best Interests’ Compared. >> 9–11 June 2016, LAWASIA conference, Hong Kong. >> 15–17 June 2016, Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration, Family Violence Conference, Melbourne. >> 16 June 2016, Judicial College of Victoria, Koori Twilight, Chaired by Justice Mordy Bromberg, County Court of Victoria, Melbourne: Communicating with Indigenous Witnesses. >> 25 June 2016, Law Council of Australia, Family Law Section, Intensive, Darwin: The latest and greatest. >> 29–30 June 2016, Asia Pacific Symposium on the 1980 Hague Convention, Tokyo.

244 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Professional legal development

Family Court judges contribute to professional legal development through their membership of and participation in professional and research-based associations. The Family Court has been consistently represented on the Family Law Council since its establishment. During 2015–16 the Family Court’s judicial representative on the Family Law Council was Justice Benjamin AM from the Hobart registry. Justice Benjamin was also APPENDIXES re-appointed as a part-time Deputy President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal in November 2015 for a further five years. Justice Benjamin is a Chair of the Family Court’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee and Chair of the Joint Courts Costs Committee. His Honour continues to serve on the Academic Committee of College of Law, including the continuing development of Master qualifications for practitioners in family law. Justice Benjamin lectures at the University of Tasmania once per year and provides papers for local legal profession conferences such as the Family Law Practitioners Association conference and Independent Children’s Lawyer conference. Justice Benjamin also continues to be part of the Tasmanian Centre for Legal Studies’ Legal Practice Course and participated in a one day moot in May 2016 with the students. Justice May from the Brisbane registry is Past President and member of the Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration; Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law; Member of the Australian Association of Women Judges; Member of the Bar Association of Queensland; Judicial Fellow of the International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers; and Advisory Board member of the Judges Forum of the International Bar Association. Justice Ainslie-Wallace from the Sydney registry is Master of the Honourable Society of the Inner Temple London; Fellow of the Australian Academy of Law; Chair, College of Law Master of Applied Law [Family Law] Advisory Committee; Adjunct Professor of Law, University of Technology, Sydney; Chair of the Australian Advocacy Institute (AAI); Chair of the AAI Management Committee; Visiting Faculty Member National Institute for Trial Advocacy (USA); Committee Member College of Law Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee; Council Member National Judicial College of Australia; and UTS High Achiever program mentor. Justice Murphy from the Brisbane registry is a Member of the Advisory Board of the World Congress on Family Law and Children’s Rights; Governing Council Member of the Judicial Conference of Australia; Member of the National Judicial College of Australia’s Judgment Writing Committee; Member of the Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia’s National Advisory Council; Member of the College of Law’s Applied Family Law Advisory Committee; Member of the Judicial Education Committee of the Family Court of Australia; Member of the International Association of Court Administration; Member of the Queensland Bar Association; Member of the Family Law Practitioners Association; and Chair of the Court Excellence Committee. Justice Strickland from the Adelaide registry is the Family Court’s nominated director on the Board of the Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Mediators and is its longest serving director. Justice Strickland is also the judge representing the Family Court on the Council of Chief Justices Rules Harmonisation Committee and is President of the Australian Chapter of the Association of Family and Conciliation Courts.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 245 8

Justice Berman from the Adelaide registry is a member of the Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity (a national body convened by the Chief Justice of the High Court and other Heads of Jurisdiction). Justice Aldridge from the Sydney registry is the Family Court representative on the Consultative Council for Australian Law Reporting. Justice Aldridge also taught with the Australian Advocacy Institute in Hong Kong, Perth, Darwin, Sydney and Wollongong. APPENDIXES Justice Forrest from the Brisbane registry participated in meetings of the Queensland Courts’ Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Justice Committee and travelled to Timor Leste for six weeks in June and July 2016 and participated in experience sharing with judges and advocacy training of local lawyers. Justice McClelland from the Sydney registry is Professorial Visiting Fellow of the University of New South Wales. Justice McClelland completed the National Judicial College of Australia’s ‘Self-Represented Litigants and Accused: International Perspectives’ online seminar program. Justice McClelland also presented the annual awards at the NSW Legal Aid Family Law Conference in August 2015 and participated in the NSW Bar Practice Course ‘Day with Judges’ component in September 2015 and May 2016. Justice Bennett from the Melbourne registry is a member of the Judicial Officers Aboriginal Cultural Awareness Committee, which is chaired by the Hon Justice Kaye of the Supreme Court of Victoria; Member of the Law Institute of Victoria Courts Practise Committee; Member of the Independent Children’s Lawyer’s User Group Committee; Member of the Japan Delegation Committee; Member of the Magistrates Court of Victoria, Family Violence Taskforce; Chair of the Court Liaison Committee and Member of the Court’s Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee and Court Education Committee. Judges are also involved in the development and conduct of the National Judicial Orientation Program, delivered through the National Judicial College, and teaching for other judicial education bodies throughout Australia. Judges regularly present to law societies and bar associations in their respective jurisdictions, as well as hold informal meetings with members of the legal profession and participate in stakeholder meetings. Judges are often asked to speak at secondary schools and lecture at law schools about particular topics and their work generally. For example, Justice Strickland was involved in continuing legal development with the Law Society of South Australia and Adelaide Law School GDLP Advocacy Coaching Clinics. Justice Bennett met with year 11 and 12 Thornbury High Indigenous students (as part of their half day exposure to the Court program). Justice Bennett also met with 12 students from Japan’s CHUO University’s Summer School program. Justice Bennett from the Melbourne registry is primary contact judge designated for Australia to the International Hague Network of Judges. During 2015–16, Justice Bennett undertook direct (case specific) judicial communication with the following countries: >> Argentina – judicial communication, mirror orders >> Hungary – judicial communication >> Canada – mirror orders >> Trinidad and Tobago – court procedure

246 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> New Zealand – meditation, mirror orders >> Singapore – complimentary orders, court proceedings, mediation >> United Kingdom – mirror orders, and >> United States – judicial communication, mirror orders.

Justice Bennett also undertook the following general network judicial communications: APPENDIXES >> 2 June 2016: the Chief Justice and Justice Bennett met with Professor Douglas Frankel and Debra Carter to discuss developments in Hague mediations and The Hague Convention Mediation Project being run by the University of Pennsylvania >> 26 May 2016: the Chief Justice and Justice Bennett met with Ambassador Susan Jacobs, United States Special Adviser for Children’s Issues, US State Department in Washington DC to discuss Hague issues including −− Implications of the enforcement or return orders in Japan −− Securing relief from prosecution for returning parents for international parental child abduction between Australia and the United States of America −− Hague issues in our Asia region >> Law Council of Australia: International Parental Child Abduction Legal Resource (Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia) sent to judicial network colleagues around the world, and >> Distribution of a USB at the Malta Conference containing procedures within each Hague Network of Judges’ jurisdiction for enforceability of measures recognised under the Convention of 19 October 1996 on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for the Protection of Children.

Legal Associates Professional Development Program Judges of the Family Court presented seminars to our legal associates on areas of expertise or special focus in an ongoing legal associates’ professional development program. This program provides legal associates with an opportunity to learn more about a particular area of law and to develop a deeper understanding of the range of issues that come before the Court. In addition, their Honours shared with the legal associates their personal career experiences. Seminars to date have been on the following topics: >> The Honourable Justice Bennett: Key differences between the 1980 and 1996 Hague Conventions. >> The Honourable Justice Berman: International Commercial Surrogacy – findings in Bernieres & Dhopal [2015] Fam CA 736. >> The Honourable Justice May: Being a Judge in the Appeal Division. >> The Honourable Justice Coate: Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 247 8

Victoria University Internship Program The Victoria University Internship Program is joint initiative with the Court and Victoria University. It is a five day program run over the semester. The program provides interns with an opportunity to witness the inner workings of a federal court, including observing different stages of court proceedings, as well as meeting with judges, associates, registrars, family consultants and court staff to hear about career paths and opportunities. APPENDIXES Included in the program is a lunch with the profession and afternoon tea with current and former associates, and discussions on post-court proceedings with the Chief Justice and Melbourne judges. The Court hosted the first program from August to December 2015 in which eight students participated and the second program from March to May 2016 in which 10 students participated.

Membership of professional associations

Judges of the Family Court are members of various professional organisations, some of which include: >> Association of Family and Conciliation Courts >> Association of International Family Judges >> Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration Incorporated >> Australian Academy of Law >> Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law >> Australian Association of Women Judges >> Australian Centre for Justice Innovation >> Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology and Law >> Bar Association of Queensland >> Centre for Childhood Development and Education >> Council of Australasian Tribunals Inc. >> Family Law Council >> Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia >> International Association of Court Administration >> International Association of Women Judges >> International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers >> International Bar Association >> Judicial Conference of Australia >> Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity >> Judicial Officers Aboriginal Cultural Awareness Committee

248 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

>> LawAsia >> Law Society of South Australia >> Menzies School of Health Research >> National Judicial College of Australia

>> NSW Bar Association APPENDIXES >> NSW Law Society >> Victorian Bar Association.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 249 8

APPENDIX ELEVEN

International visitors

During 2015–16, the Court had visitors and worked with delegations from the following APPENDIXES countries.

Board of Imams Victoria Justice Johns of the Melbourne registry along with Leisha Lister (Executive Officer), Manuela Galvao (Regional Coordinator, Child Dispute Services) and Rasheel Kaur (Senior Registrar) hosted representatives from the Board of Imams Victoria on 31 May 2016 to discuss divorce and family law in Australia. The programme was organised by the Sir Zelman Cowen Centre which provides legal education, training and research as well as support services on law-related topics to industry, government and the community.

Representatives from the Board of Imams Victoria and Family Court staff

Denmark In February 2016, the Court participated in teleconferences with staff from the Denmark Ministry for Children, Gender Equality, Integration and Social Affairs who are currently reviewing the Danish system, particularly around cooperative parenting, and are interested the Australian model. The Danish delegation sought information about the Australian family law system.

Fiji In August 2015, the Court assisted the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement with their scoping study to document women’s experiences in utilising Family Court services and their experiences of the Family Law Act, Domestic Violence and Crimes Decree. The scoping study focuses on what are the varied experiences of women in accessing justice in terms of the family law system; and the barriers that women in Fiji face to access the family law services.

250 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

India In December 2015, in conjunction with the Asia Law Centre at the University of Melbourne, the Chief Justice hosted Ms Flavia Agnes, a senior legal scholar, author, and women’s rights activist and a leading thinker in family law in India, at the Melbourne registry. Ms Agnes has written and published extensively on minorities and the law, gender and law, law in the context of women’s movements, and on issues of domestic violence and feminist jurisprudence. APPENDIXES

Italy On 7 March, Justice Bennett’s chambers hosted a lunch for visiting Italian judge, Justice Giacomo Oberto. The lunch was part of a broader visit with Justice Tony Pagone of the Federal Court. The lunch was attended by Family Court and Federal Circuit Court judges, including Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO. Discussion topics included family law in Italy, money cases, pre-nuptial issues, judicial networking and rule of law. During his stay, Justice Oberto gave a lecture at Melbourne University titled ‘Prenuptial agreements in contemplation of divorce: European and Italian perspectives’. He also attended and presented at a number of seminars and events as part of his visit with the Federal Court. Justice Oberto has been a judge of the Civil Court of Turin since 1984, where he deals with civil and commercial law cases. His professional appointments include Italian delegate to the Second Study Commission of the International Association of Judges since 1991, and Secretary-General to the International Association of Judges since November 1991.

From left: Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO, Justice Giacomo Oberto and Justice Victoria Bennett

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 251 8

Japan

May 2015 Ms Satomi Asaki, a Family Court Probation Officer from the Fukuoka High Court and visiting scholar at the ANU, spent time at the National Support Office to investigate ICT systems in the Court, in particular the video-link system, IT equipment in the courtroom and the APPENDIXES Commonwealth Courts Portal.

August 2015 Parramatta registry welcomed Judge Taku Okada, Assistant Judge, Osaka District Court, Sakai Branch, Japan, to discuss the provision of human resources and judicial education.

From left: Jaimol Poovakkulathuchacko (Team Leader Registry Services), Sue McLear (Team Leader Judicial Services), Mark Palmer (Senior Family Consultant), Paul Le Large (Registry Manager), Hidekazu Nozawa (Hiroshima High Court), Sally Mashman (Manager NEC), Judge Taku Okada (Japan)

September 2015 In conjunction with the Asian Law Centre of the Melbourne University, delegates from the Court, headed by the Honourable Justice Benjamin, travelled to Japan to undertake co-mediation training in September 2015 and to assist participants in the Australia/Japan

252 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Co-Mediation Initiative in Hague Matters. Training in Japan went a long way to formulating a Hague Co-Mediation model to reflect the needs of families in cross border family disputes between Australia and Japan. For more information see page 8.

February 2016 Parramatta registry hosted Judge Okada and Senior Administrator Hidekazu Nozawa from APPENDIXES Japan. The Court assisted the delegation’s research in the area of access to justice and client services.

February 2016 National Support Office hosted a visit of Yoshiko Ohmachi, Family Court Probation Officer in Japan and Mr Takuya, Assistant Director in the Personnel Division of the Secretariat of the Nagoya District Court. The delegation was interested in information technology, especially the Commonwealth Court’s Portal and eFiling.

Malaysia In May 2016, Dr Norliah Ibrahim (Associate Professor, Ahmad Ibrahim Kulliyyah of Laws, International Islamic University Malaysia) and Prof Dr Zuhairah Ariff Abd Ghadas (Dean, Faculty of Law and International Relations, University Sultan Zainal Abidin, Malaysia) visited the Melbourne registry to discuss: the basis of law for determining matrimonial property relating to intangible interests; the Court’s approach to claims of increase in earnings as matrimonial property; the Court’s view on claims of future interest such as prospective business profits/ assets and interest in investments as claims of matrimonial property; and whether the principle for the best interest of the children be applied in matrimonial property claims

Myanmar In November 2015, Ms Tin Nwe Soe (Director, Office of the Supreme Court of the Union) and Ms Khin Myo Myo Su Kyaw (Staff Officer, Office of the Supreme Court of the Union) visited the Sydney registry to discuss efficiency, judicial independence and public confidence in courts.

Republic of Korea On 1 June 2016, the Director of the Child Support Agency (CSA) of Korea, SUN HEE LEE, and five CSA officers visited the Parramatta registry gain a better understanding of Australia’s child support policy in order to improve the provision of child support services in Korea. The visit was part of a five-day tour of New Zealand and Australia and the visit to the Parramatta included presentations from Sally Cole and Jim McCulloch of the Child Support Service of Legal Aid NSW.

Sri Lanka In March 2016, in conjunction with the Deakin Law School, the Chief Justice hosted a delegation of judges from Sri Lanka.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 253 8

Thailand and Cambodia In July 2015, as part of the Australian Aid funded programme, Australia-Asia Program to combat trafficking in persons (AAPTIP), the Family Court participated in several roundtable discussions with the judiciary from both Cambodia and Thailand. The roundtables in Thailand focussed on the particular needs of vulnerable witnesses,

APPENDIXES children and human trafficking victims; protection of witnesses, including in-court services available to vulnerable witnesses; and case-flow management. In Cambodia they focussed on: victim witness issues in the human trafficking context; victim-witness protection in the Australian context, with a focus on minors; and an overview of AAPTIP projects focused on victim-witness protection.

Roundtable participants in Bangkok, Thailand

Trinidad and Tobago In June 2016, through the National Center for State Courts, the Family Court assisted the United Nations Development Programme Juvenile Court Project in Barataria in the area of public confidence in courts, transparency and the online publishing of judgments.

254 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

V anuatu In August 2015, through the Australian Aid funded Police and Justice Support Program in Vanuatu, the Sydney registry hosted two court administrators from the Vanuatu Courts to assist them to gain a better understanding of case management and data collection.

Vietnam APPENDIXES In August 2015, in conjunction with UNICEF and the Supreme People’s Court of Vietnam, the Chief Justice and Leisha Lister participated in a two-day meeting in Ho Chi Minh City (Saigon) to assist the Supreme People’s Court of Vietnam with the current reform of Vietnam’s Civil Code and Civil Procedure Code and Vietnam’s newly established (but yet to be operationalised) Juvenile and Family Court. The Court will have jurisdiction over family law matters where children are involved. The two-day meeting was very successful and the Family Court was able to share with participants, details on how the Court determines the best interests of the child and about medical procedures that require court authorisation.

COMMON LAW AND COMMONWEALTH CONFERENCE

Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO and the panel of international experts

Chief Justice Diana Bryant hosted the Commonwealth and Common Law International Family Justice Conference in Coogee in November 2015. The international judicial meeting stimulated discussion on a range of topics within the wider theme of our common law and commonwealth alliance within family law. The meeting brought together 80 justices from around the world to exchange views, create resolutions, encourage commonality of approach and build bridges between differing systems of family law. Some of the important topics covered by the panel of international experts included international relocation, the Hague Abduction and Protection Conventions, the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, inter-country adoption and surrogacy. The meeting also provided an opportunity to promote and nurture relationships with countries that are not yet parties to the Hague Conventions.

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 255 8

APPENDIX TWELVE

Contact details

Chief Justice’s Chambers APPENDIXES Owen Dixon Commonwealth Law Courts 305 William Street Melbourne VIC 3000 (GPO Box 9991, Melbourne VIC 3001)

Deputy Chief Justice’s Chambers Nigel Bowen Commonwealth Law Courts Cnr University Avenue and Childers Street Canberra ACT 2600 (GPO Box 9991, Canberra ACT 2601)

National Support Office Chief Executive Officer 15 London Circuit Canberra ACT 2601 (GPO Box 9991, Canberra ACT 2601)

National Enquiry Centre The National Enquiry Centre (NEC) is the entry point for all telephone and email enquiries on Family Court of Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia matters. The NEC provides information and procedural advice, forms and brochures, and referrals to community and support services. NEC staff cannot provide legal advice. The NEC is opened from 8.30am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday. PO Box 9991, Parramatta NSW 2124 Phone: 1300 352 000

TTY/voice calls: Contact the National Relay Service on 133 677 or for Speak and Listen calls contact 1300 555 727 International: +61 2 8892 8590 Email: [email protected] Family Court website: www.familycourt.gov.au Federal Circuit Court website: www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au Twitter: @FamilyCourtAU YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/user/familycourtAU

256 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

Family law registries

Australian Capital Territory

Canberra Nigel Bowen Commonwealth Law Courts APPENDIXES Cnr University Ave and Childers Street Canberra ACT 2600 (GPO Box 9991, Canberra ACT 2601)

New South Wales

Albury Level 1, 463 Kiewa Street Albury NSW 2640 (PO Box 914, Albury NSW 2640)

Dubbo Cnr Macquarie and Wingewarra Streets Dubbo NSW 2830 (PO Box 1567, Dubbo NSW 2830)

Lismore Level 2, 29–31 Molesworth Street Lismore NSW 2480 (PO Box 9, Lismore NSW 2480)

Newcastle 61 Bolton Street Newcastle NSW 2300 (PO Box 9991, Newcastle NSW 2300)

Parramatta Garfield Barwick Commonwealth Law Courts 1–3 George Street Parramatta NSW 2124 (PO Box 9991, Parramatta NSW 2124)

Sydney Lionel Bowen Commonwealth Law Courts 97–99 Goulburn Street Sydney NSW 2000 (GPO Box 9991, Sydney NSW 2001)

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 257 8

Wollongong Level 1, 43 Burelli Street Wollongong NSW 2500 (PO Box 825, Wollongong NSW 2500)

Northern Territory APPENDIXES

Alice Springs Westpoint Building Cnr Railway Terrace and Stott Terrace Alice Springs NT 0870 (GPO Box 9991, Darwin NT 0801)

Darwin Supreme Court Building State Square Darwin NT 0800 (GPO Box 9991, Darwin NT 0801)

Queensland

Brisbane Harry Gibbs Commonwealth Law Courts 119 North Quay Brisbane QLD 4000 (GPO Box 9991, Brisbane QLD 4001)

Cairns Commonwealth Government Centre Level 3 and 4, 104 Grafton Street Cairns QLD 4870 (PO Box 9991, Cairns QLD 4870)

Rockhampton Virgil Power Building Ground Floor 46 East Street (Cnr Fitzroy Street) Rockhampton QLD 4700 (PO Box 9991, Rockhampton QLD 4700)

Townsville Level 2, Commonwealth Centre 143 Walker Street Townsville QLD 4810 (PO Box 9991, Townsville QLD 4810)

258 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 8

South Australia

Adelaide Roma Mitchell Commonwealth Law Courts 3 Angas Street Adelaide SA 5000 APPENDIXES (GPO Box 9991, Adelaide SA 5001)

Tasmania

Hobart Edward Braddon Commonwealth Law Courts 39–41 Davey Street Hobart TAS 7000 (GPO Box 9991, Hobart TAS 7001)

Launceston Level 3, ANZ Building Cnr Brisbane and George Streets Launceston TAS 7250 (PO Box 9991, Launceston TAS 7250)

Victoria

Dandenong 53–55 Robinson Street Dandenong VIC 3175 (PO Box 9991, Dandenong VIC 3175)

Melbourne Owen Dixon Commonwealth Law Courts 305 William Street Melbourne VIC 3000 (GPO Box 9991, Melbourne VIC 3001)

Western Australia

Perth Family Court of Western Australia Peter Durack Commonwealth Law Courts 150 Terrace Road Perth WA 6000 (GPO Box 9991, Perth WA 6848) 08 9224 8222

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 259

OVERVIEW OF THEINDEXES COURT

92 9

LIST OF REQUIREMENTS INDEXES

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report 17AD(g) Letter of transmittal

17AI A copy of the letter of transmittal signed Mandatory III and dated by accountable authority on date final text approved, with statement that the report has been prepared in accordance with section 46 of the Act and any enabling legislation that specifies additional requirements in relation to the annual report

17AD(h) Aids to access

17AJ(a) Table of contents Mandatory IV

17AJ(b) Alphabetical index Mandatory 269

17AJ(c) Glossary of abbreviations and acronyms Mandatory XIII

17AJ(d) List of requirements Mandatory 262

17AJ(e) Details of contact officer Mandatory II

17AJ(f) Entity’s website address Mandatory II

17AJ(g) Electronic address of report Mandatory II

17AD(a) Review by accountable authority

17AD(a) A review by the accountable authority Mandatory 4 of the entity

17AD(b) Overview of the entity

17AE(1)(a)(i) A description of the role and functions Mandatory 12 of the entity

17AE(1)(a)(ii) A description of the organisational Mandatory 97 structure of the entity

17AE(1)(a)(iii) A description of the outcomes and Mandatory 13 programmes administered by the entity

262 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report 17AE(1)(a)(iv) A description of the purposes of the Mandatory 12

entity as included in corporate plan INDEXES

17AE(1)(b) An outline of the structure of the portfolio Portfolio N/A of the entity departments – mandatory

17AE(2) Where the outcomes and programmes If applicable, NIL TO administered by the entity differ from any mandatory REPORT Portfolio Budget Statement, Portfolio Additional Estimates Statement or other portfolio estimates statement that was prepared for the entity for the period, include details of variation and reasons for change

17AD(c) Report on the performance of the entity

Annual performance statements

17AD(c)(i); 16F Annual performance statement in Mandatory 40; 59; 70 accordance with paragraph 39(1)(b) of the Act and section 16F of the Rule

17AD(c)(ii) Report on financial performance

17AF(1)(a) A discussion and analysis of the entity’s Mandatory 137 financial performance

17AF(1)(b) A table summarising the total resources Mandatory 198 and total payments of the entity

17AF(2) If there may be significant changes in the If applicable, 141 financial results during or after the previous mandatory or current reporting period, information on those changes, including: the cause of any operating loss of the entity; how the entity has responded to the loss and the actions that have been taken in relation to the loss; and any matter or circumstances that it can reasonably be anticipated will have a significant impact on the entity’s future operation or financial results

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 263 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report 17AD(d) Management and accountability INDEXES Corporate governance

17AG(2)(a) Information on compliance with Mandatory 118 section 10 (fraud systems)

17AG(2)(b)(i) A certification by accountable authority Mandatory 119 that fraud risk assessments and fraud control plans have been prepared

17AG(2)(b)(ii) A certification by accountable authority that Mandatory 119 appropriate mechanisms for preventing, detecting incidents of, investigating or otherwise dealing with, and recording or reporting fraud that meet the specific needs of the entity are in place

17AG(2)(b)(iii) A certification by accountable authority that all Mandatory 119 reasonable measures have been taken to deal appropriately with fraud relating to the entity

17AG(2)(c) An outline of structures and processes in Mandatory 96 place for the entity to implement principles and objectives of corporate governance

17AG(2)(d) – (e) A statement of significant issues reported If applicable, 122 to Minister under paragraph 19(1)(e) of the mandatory Act that relates to non-compliance with Finance law and action taken to remedy noncompliance

External scrutiny

17AG(3) Information on the most significant Mandatory 122 developments in external scrutiny and the entity’s response to the scrutiny

17AG(3)(a) Information on judicial decisions and decisions If applicable, 122 of administrative tribunals and by the Australian mandatory Information Commissioner that may have a significant effect on the operations of the entity

17AG(3)(b) Information on any reports on operations If applicable, 122 of the entity by the Auditor-General mandatory (other than report under section 43 of the Act), a Parliamentary Committee, or the Commonwealth Ombudsman

17AG(3)(c) Information on any capability reviews on the If applicable, 124 entity that were released during the period mandatory

264 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report Management of Human Resources INDEXES 17AG(4)(a) An assessment of the entity’s effectiveness Mandatory 125 in managing and developing employees to achieve entity objectives

17AG(4)(b) Statistics on the entity’s APS employees Mandatory 200 on an ongoing and non-ongoing basis; including the following: >> Statistics on staffing classification level >> Statistics on full-time employees >> Statistics on part-time employees >> Statistics on gender >> Statistics on staff location >> Statistics on employees who identify as Indigenous

17AG(4)(c) Information on any enterprise agreements, Mandatory 133 individual flexibility arrangements, Australian workplace agreements, common law contracts and determinations under subsection 24(1) of the Public Service Act 1999

17AG(4)(c)(i) Information on the number of SES and Mandatory 207 non-SES employees covered by agreements etc. identified in paragraph 17AD(4)(c)

17AG(4)(c)(ii) The salary ranges available for APS Mandatory 209 employees by classification level

17AG(4)(c)(iii) A description of non-salary benefits Mandatory 134 provided to employees

17AG(4)(d)(i) Information on the number of employees If applicable, 134 at each classification level who received mandatory performance pay

17AG(4)(d)(ii) Information on aggregate amounts of If applicable, N/A performance pay at each classification level mandatory

17AG(4)(d)(iii) Information on the average amount of If applicable, N/A performance payment, and range of such mandatory payments, at each classification level

17AG(4)(d)(iv) Information on aggregate amount of If applicable, N/A performance payments mandatory

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 265 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report Assets management INDEXES 17AG(5) An assessment of effectiveness of assets If applicable, 143 management where asset management is mandatory a significant part of the entity’s activities

Purchasing

17AG(6) An assessment of entity performance against Mandatory 142 the Commonwealth Procurement Rules

Consultants

17AG(7)(a) A summary statement detailing the number of Mandatory 142 new contracts engaging consultants entered into during the period; the total actual expenditure on all new consultancy contracts entered into during the period (inclusive of GST); the number of ongoing consultancy contracts that were entered into during a previous reporting period; and the total actual expenditure in the reporting year on the ongoing consultancy contracts (inclusive of GST)

17AG(7)(b) A statement that “During [reporting period], Mandatory 142 [specified number] new consultancy contracts were entered into involving total actual expenditure of $[specified million]. In addition, [specified number] ongoing consultancy contracts were active during the period, involving total actual expenditure of $[specified million]”

17AG(7)(c) A summary of the policies and procedures Mandatory 142 for selecting and engaging consultants and the main categories of purposes for which consultants were selected and engaged

17AG(7)(d) A statement that “Annual reports contain Mandatory 142 information about actual expenditure on contracts for consultancies. Information on the value of contracts and consultancies is available on the AusTender website.”

266 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report Australian National Audit Office Access Clauses INDEXES 17AG(8) If an entity entered into a contract with a If applicable, 142 value of more than $100,000 (inclusive of mandatory GST) and the contract did not provide the Auditor-General with access to the contractor’s premises, the report must include the name of the contractor, purpose and value of the contract, and the reason why a clause allowing access was not included in the contract

Exempt contracts

17AG(9) If an entity entered into a contract or there If applicable, 142 is a standing offer with a value greater than mandatory $10,000 (inclusive of GST) which has been exempted from being published in AusTender because it would disclose exempt matters under the FOI Act, the annual report must include a statement that the contract or standing offer has been exempted, and the value of the contract or standing offer, to the extent that doing so does not disclose the exempt matters

Small business

17AG(10)(a) A statement that “[Name of entity] Mandatory 143 supports small business participation in the Commonwealth Government procurement market. Small and Medium Enterprises (SME) and Small Enterprise participation statistics are available on the Department of Finance’s website.”

17AG(10)(b) An outline of the ways in which the Mandatory 143 procurement practices of the entity support small and medium enterprises

17AG(10)(c) If the entity is considered by the Department If applicable, 143 administered by the Finance Minister mandatory as material in nature—a statement that “[Name of entity] recognises the importance of ensuring that small businesses are paid on time. The results of the Survey of Australian Government Payments to Small Business are available on the Treasury’s website.”

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 267 9

PGPA Rule Description Requirement Page of Reference this report Financial statements INDEXES 17AD(e) Inclusion of the annual financial statements in Mandatory 147 accordance with subsection 43(4) of the Act

17AD(f) Other mandatory information

17AH(1)(a)(i) If the entity conducted advertising campaigns, If applicable, N/A a statement that “During [reporting period], mandatory the [name of entity] conducted the following advertising campaigns: [name of advertising campaigns undertaken]. Further information on those advertising campaigns is available at [address of entity’s website] and in the reports on Australian Government advertising prepared by the Department of Finance. Those reports are available on the Department of Finance’s website.”

17AH(1)(a)(ii) If the entity did not conduct advertising If applicable, 213 campaigns, a statement to that effect mandatory

17AH(1)(b) A statement that “Information on grants If applicable, 218 awarded to [name of entity] during mandatory [reporting period] is available at [address of entity’s website].”

17AH(1)(c) Outline of mechanisms of disability reporting, Mandatory 136 including reference to website for further information

17AH(1)(d) Website reference to where the entity’s Mandatory 119 Information Publication Scheme statement pursuant to Part II of FOI Act can be found

17AH(1)(e) Correction of material errors in previous If applicable, 145 annual report mandatory

17AH(2) Information required by other legislation Mandatory 210; 213; 214

268 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

ALPHABETICAL INDEX INDEXES

A Agnew, Steve Abduramanaoski & Abduramanaoska (2005) Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory FLC 93–215, 91 Group, 114, 220 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach agreement making, 133–4, 206–7 Committee, 110, 111, 245, 246 Ainslie-Wallace, Hon. Justice Ann Margaret Aboriginal culture Appeal Division, 72, 99 recognition of within Family Law Act, 229 and Australian Academy of Law, 245 Aboriginal Legal Service, 228 and Australian Advocacy Institute, 245 Aboriginal services, 229 and College of Law Dispute Resolution abuse see child abuse; child sexual abuse; Advisory Committee, 245 family violence and abuse (or risk) and College of Law Master of Applied Law access and inclusion, 31–2 [Family Law] Advisory Committee, 245 access and inclusion framework, 31, 32 Court Policy Committee, 105 accountable authority, 40, 59, 70 and Honourable Society of the Inner Temple London, 245 Accountable Authority Instructions, 118, 142 and National Institute for Trial Advocacy (USA), 245 Acknowledgment of Country and National Judicial College of Australia, 245 court protocol for, 111 Professional Development and Judicial Welfare action in defamation, 122 Committee, 220 ‘Activity Stream’, 26 Sydney registry, 100, 245 Acworth, Brian and University of Technology, Sydney, 245 Audit and Risk Committee, 221 Albury registry Adam P Brown Male Fashions Proprietary Limited v contact details, 257 Philip Morris Inc. and Anor (1981) 148 CLR 170, 88 Aldridge, Hon. Justice Murray Robert Adelaide Law School GDLP Advocacy Coaching Clinics, 246 Appeal Division, 72, 99 Adelaide registry and Australian Advocacy Institute, 246 Child Dispute Services area refurbishment, 112 and Consultative Council for Australian Law Reporting, 246 contact details, 259 Sydney registry, 100, 246 counter waiting times, 21 Alice Springs registry judges, 99, 245, 246 contact details, 258 and NAIDOC Week 2015, 231 Altobelli, Judge Tom and South Australian Living Arts festival, 231 Family Violence Committee, 113 Adelaide University, 231 Andronicos, Roland administered revenue, 141 Australia Day award, 127 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 245 annual performance statement and Freedom of Information matters, 119 judicial services, 40–58 judges, 101, 245 registry services, 59–66 proceedings before, 122 appeal caseload, 55 administrative matters appeal demographics complaints about, 65–6 by gender, 77 advertising and market research, 213 by representation status, 78 After Hours Service Appeal Division, 5, 55 telephone calls, 64 annual performance statement, 70–9 Agnes, Flavia analysis of performance against purpose, 73–9 on women’s rights in context of family breakdown in India, 234, 251 results, 70–3 judges assigned to, 99 judicial information technology requirements, 112 membership, 71–2

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 269 9

appeals, 5, 69–79 Association of Family and Conciliation Courts abandoned or withdrawn, 76 (Seattle) conference, 31 administration of, 73 Atkinson, Akasha finalised, 3, 73 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 Attorney-General’s Department, 225

INDEXES age of, 78 type of finalisation, 76–7 and Australia–Japan collaboration, 8 other applications filed re, 75 and Family Law Forum, 225 pending (active), 73 and Pathways, 225 trends in, 73–7 review of federal courts, 115 disposal rate, 73 Audit and Risk Committee, 114, 115, 117, 118, 119, 221 number of filed, 73 and Family Law Forum, 225 unrepresented applicants, 5 Auditor-General see also Notice of Appeals reports, 122 Appeals Registrar, 73 Aurion/employee self-service reporting, 125 appellate court AusTender national coverage as, 55 and exempt contracts, 142 appellate jurisdiction, 72 AusTender website The Applicability of Trauma-Informed and expenditure on contracts and consultancies Child-Focussed Practice to Family Consultant on, 142 Interventions Austin, Hon. Justice Stewart Craig literature review, 229 Court Performance Committee, 108, 219 Application for Divorce Kit, 21 Court Policy Committee, 105 applications Finance Committee, 106 2011–12 to 2015–16, 48 Newcastle registry, 100 clearance rates, 49 AustlII time pending, 50 Court decisions on, 6, 84 time to finalise, 53 judgments of Family Court on, 7 see also pending applications Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration, 109, applications files, 3 135, 245 applications for consent orders, 41, 48 conference, 229 drafting, 229 Australia Day achievement medallions and awards, applications for final orders, 41, 43, 44, 47 127–8 see also finalised applications Australia Indonesia Partnership for Justice applications in a case, 41, 47 and evaluation of the role of civil society in justice reform in Indonesia, 34 applications in an appeal, 5 Australia-Asia Program to Combat Trafficking appointments, retirements and resignations, 4, 5, in Persons, 254 101–2, 226 Australia–Japan collaboration, 8–9, 252–3 arbitration, 24 Australia/Japan Co-Mediation Initiative in Argentina, 246 Hague Matters, 252–3 Asaki, Satomi, 252 Australian Academy of Law, 245 Asia Law Centre, University of Melbourne Australian Advocacy Institute, 245, 246 and Flavia Agnes on women’s rights in context Australian Aid of family breakdown in India, 234 and Australia-Asia Program to Combat and visit of Hon. Justice Bennett to Japan, 252 Trafficking in Persons, 254 Asia Pacific Symposium on the 1980 and Police and Justice Support Program in Hague Convention (Tokyo), 9 Vanuatu, 255 Asquith, Matt Australian Association of Women Judges, 245 National Consultative Committee, 222 Australian Capital Territory Asset Movements, 137 Court service locations, 16–17 assets and property management, 143–5 registry contact details, 257 asset management, 143 see also New South Wales/ projects, 143, 144 Australian Capital Territory Association of Family and Conciliation Courts, 135 Australian Capital Territory Family Law Pathways Australian Chapter, 245 Network, 227

270 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

Australian Capital Territory Legal Aid, 227 and Family Law Council, 245 Independent Children’s Lawyer Advisory and Family law Practitioners Association Committee, 227 conference, 245 Australian Capital Territory Women’s Awards Hobart registry, 100, 245 Ceremony 2016, 227 and Independent Children’s Lawyer INDEXES Australian Constitution conference, 245 FCA under Chapter III of, 12, 40, 59, 70, 141 Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 FCC under Chapter III of, 141 and Tasmanian Centre for Legal Studies’ Legal and judicial power, 96 Practice Course, 245 Australian Federal Police and University of Tasmania, 245 and Victorian Royal Commission into Bennett, Hon. Justice Victoria Jane Family Violence, 233 Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Australian Institute of Family Law Arbitrators and Committee, 246 Mediators, 245 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 Australian Institute of Family Studies, 110, 136, 224, 233 and Australia–Japan collaboration, 8, 9 Evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence and CHUO Summer School 2016 Amendments, 6 (students from Japan), 234, 246 and Family Law Forum, 225 Court Education Committee, 246 Australian National Audit Office and Court Liaison Committee, 246 and Audit and Risk Committee, 221 and Independent Children’s Lawyer’s User audit services, 139 Group Committee, 246 report, 115 and International Hague Network of Judges, 246–7 Australian Psychological Society, 30 and Japan Delegation Committee, 246 Australian Public Service Commission and Judicial Officers Aboriginal Cultural APS Statistical Bulletin, 136 Awareness Committee, 246 State of the Service Report, 136 and Law Institute of Victoria Courts Practise Committee, 246 Australian Public Service Values and Code of Conduct, 116, 120, 126 and Legal Associates Professional Development Program, 247 Australian Standard AS ISO 10002—2006 (complaints handling), 65 and Magistrates Court of Victoria, Family Violence Taskforce, 246 Australian Standards of Practice for Family Assessments and Reporting, 29 Melbourne registry, 100, 246 Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs), 132, 133, 207 and Professor Douglas Frankel and Debra Carter re Hague mediations and The Hague minimum and maximum salary ranges by Convention Mediation Project, 247 classification, 208 and Thornbury High Indigenous students, 234, 246 B and US Ambassador Susan Jacobs re Hague issues, 247 ‘Back to Country’ weekend, 111 and Victorian Royal Commission into backlog, 49 Family Violence, 233 backlog indicators, 49–51 visit to Japan, 252–3 Bad Debts, 137 and visiting judge from Italy, 251 balancing work and personal life, 126 Berman, Hon. Justice David Michael Bankruptcy Act 1966, 13 Adelaide registry, 99, 246 Bar Association of Queensland, 245 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 Baumann. Judge Michael Court Policy Committee, 105 Unrepresented Litigants Working Party, 225 Finance Committee, 106, 219 Bell, Hon. Justice Graham Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, 112 retirement of, 5 and Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, 246 Benjamin AM, Hon. Justice Robert James Charles and Legal Associates Professional Development Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Program, 247 Committee, 111, 245 Rules Committee, 107 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101, 245 births and marriages in Indonesia and Australia–Japan collaboration, 8, 252–3 registration of, 33, 34 and ‘Back to Country’ weekend, 111 Board of Imams Victoria, 250 and College of Law, Academic Committee, 245 see also Council of Imams

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 271 9

Bond University High School Mooting Competition, 227 C Briggs, Sharon Cairns registry Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 asset and property projects, 143 Brisbane Magistrates Domestic Violence Court, 231 contact details, 258

INDEXES Brisbane registry CALD and African-Australian communities and Brisbane Magistrates Domestic Violence within Family Law: Access and Equality from Court, 231 a Woman’s Perspective forum, 234 contact details, 258 Cambodia counter waiting times, 21 roundtable discussions in re Australia-Asia eDivorce pilot, 24 Program to Combat Trafficking in Persons, 254 judges, 99, 245, 246 Canada, 246 and Justice of the Peace service, 231 Canberra registry specialist domestic violence court pilot, 232 and 2016 ACT Women’s Awards Ceremony, 227 Brocklehurst, Adrian, 103 and ACT Family Law Pathways Network, 227 Audit and Risk Committee, 221 and ACT Legal Aid, 227 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory and ACT Legal Aid Independent Children’s Group, 114, 220 Lawyer Advisory Committee, 227 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 collaborative engagements, 226–7 Brown, Judge Stewart contact details, 257 Family Violence Committee, 113 and Domestic Violence: The Legal Services Bryant, Andrew Challenge workshop, 227 Australia Day award, 128 and Family Law and Child Protection: Bryant AO, Hon. Chief Justice Diana, 98 collaboration or confusion, 227 Appeal Division, 99 and Family Law Committee, 227 and Australia–Japan collaboration, 8 judges, 99 and Commonwealth and Common Law and Office for Children, Youth and International Family Justice Conference, 255 Family Support, 227 Court Policy Committee, 105, 219 Portal training, 227 and delegation of judges from Sri Lanka, 253 and Relationships Australia, 227 and Flavia Agnes on women’s rights in context and Women’s Legal Centre, 227 of family breakdown in India, 251 Carew, Hon. Justice Catherine Melbourne registry, 100 appointment, 101, 102 and Professor Douglas Frankel and Debra Carter Brisbane registry, 5, 99 re Hague mediations and The Hague Carl, Eberhard, 9 Convention Mediation Project, 247 Carter, Debra and US Ambassador Susan Jacobs re Hague and Hague mediations and The Hague issues, 247 Convention Mediation Project, 247 visit to Vietnam re Vietnam legal system, 255 case attrition, 45 and visiting judge from Italy, 251 case management see also Chief Justice Court Performance Committee and, 108 Budget 2015–16 see also Casetrack merger of corporate functions of FCA and case management judges, 96 FCC with those of Federal Court, 124, 141 case management policies and manuals, 116 Business and Industry Engagement on Domestic caseload, 41 Violence Project appeals, 55 Domestic Violence: The Legal Services cases finalised Challenge workshop, 227 percentage of, 52–3 business area plans, 116 Casetrack business continuity, 115 enhancements, 20 business continuity desktop scenarios, 118 chambers training see client service and Business Continuity Plans, 118 chambers training Byrne, Adele Chief Executive Instructions, 117 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Chief Executive Officer Group, 114, 220 and Audit and Risk Committee, 115 Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113

272 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

and Family Violence Committee, 113 Child Dispute Services’ family consultants, 29 and judicial information technology Child Protection, 235 requirements, 112 Child Protection Convention 1996, 5 powers and responsibilities, 96, 102 child protection worker and Principal Registrar roles combined, 4

co-located at Melbourne and Dandenong INDEXES and public interest disclosure, 120 registries, 233 and senior management committees, 114 child sexual abuse, 13, 58 and support Child Support expenditure, 140 and Family Law Forum, 225 see also Foster PSM FAIM, Richard Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, 13 Chief Executive Officer eMessages, 117 Part 7: appellate jurisdiction of FCA, 72 Chief Executive Officer of Domestic Violence NSW, 136 Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988, 13 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Part VIII: appellate jurisdiction of FCA, 72 Group (CMAG), 114–15, 220 Child Support Stakeholder Engagement Group, 232 financial reports to, 118 Child Support Stakeholder Engagement Program, 230 Chief Information Officer child welfare agency, 13 powers and responsibilities, 103 children Chief Judge new material for on website, 31 Australian Standards of Practice for Children’s Committee, 110–11 Family Assessments and Reporting, 29 and new material for children on website, 31 and Family Violence Committee, 113 Children’s Contact Services, 230 Chief Justice Churchill Fellowship, 226 activities, 236–9 cleaning see waste/cleaning conferences attended and papers clearance rate, 49 delivered, 236–7 Cleary, Hon. Justice Margaret Ann Australian Standards of Practice for Newcastle registry, 100 Family Assessments and Reporting, 29 NSW Magellan Steering Committee, 226 chambers contact details, 256 client feedback and complaints management, 65–6 and Family Violence Committee, 113 see also complaints; feedback and service and International Framework for Court improvements Excellence, 28 client service advices, 117 and Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT), 33 client service and chambers training, 136 and judicial information technology Client Service Senior Managers’ Group (CSSMG), 24 requirements, 112 Clinical Induction Program, 135 responsibilities, 96, 98 Coate, Hon. Justice Jennifer Ann year in review, 4–6 and Legal Associates Professional Development year in review—changes from 1 July 2016, 4–7 Program, 247 see also Bryant AO, Hon. Chief Justice Diana Melbourne registry, 100 Chief Justice eMessages, 117 Coffs Harbour registry child abuse, 5, 6, 13, 57 local family law practitioners associations and Pathways groups, 232 Child Dispute Services (CDS), 29–31 Cole, Chris and Association of Family and Conciliation Courts (Seattle) conference, 31 National Consultative Committee, 222 and Clinical Induction Program, 135 Cole, Sally, 253 and Greater Newcastle Family Law Pathways collaborative committees, 113 Network, 230 College of Law national conference for family consultants, 135 Academic Committee, 245 and placement of social work student in Applied Family Law Advisory Committee, 245 Parramatta registry, 229 Dispute Resolution Advisory Committee, 245 and s 11F interventions/assessments, 30 Master of Applied Law [Family Law] Advisory seminar series for family consultants, judges Committee, 245 and family lawyers, 134 Comcover benchmarking survey, 118 and Uniting Care post separation service co-mediation see Japan Co-Mediation Program providers, 232 and Victoria Pathways, 233

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 273 9

committees, 219–23 Constitution see Australian Constitution see also collaborative committees; consultants, 142 judicial committees; senior management Consultative Council for Australian Law Reporting, 246 committees; standing committees; contact details, 256–9 sub-committees

INDEXES Continuing Professional Development (CPD) common law contracts, 132, 133, 207 framework, 136 Commonwealth and Common Law International Contract Management, 117 Family Justice Conference, 226, 255 Convention on Jurisdiction, Applicable Law, Commonwealth Courts Portal, 18–19, 60, 228, 229, Recognition, Enforcement and Co-operation in 252, 253 Respect of Parental Responsibility and Measures for and divorce, 20, 21 the Protection of Children (19 October 1996), 247 new video, 146 Converge International registered users, 3, 18–19 and Employee Assistance Program and support, 62, 63 Manager Assistance Program, 137 Commonwealth Disability Strategy, 136 Cooley, Michelle Commonwealth Electoral Act 1918 Australia Day award, 128 and advertising and market research, 213 Core Knowledge Database, 135 Commonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2011, 118 corporate and operational planning and associated Commonwealth Law Courts performance reporting and review, 116–17 courtrooms and chambers within, 139 corporate costs, 140 Commonwealth Law Courts rent, 137 corporate culture/communication Commonwealth Ombudsman and environmental impact minimisation, 216 Better Practice Guide to Complaint Handling, 65 corporate governance, 96–7 reports, 122 Corporate Plan, 116 Commonwealth Procurement Rules, 142 corporate services Communications team expenditure, 140 expenditure, 140 Corporate Services Amalgamation Project, 125 Community and Public Sector Union Corporate Services Division and National Consultative Committee, 222 Human Resources section, 125 community engagement, 6–7 correction of errors in 2014–15 report, 145 community relationships and consultation, 25 Council of Chief Justices see also local registry consultations and other and Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, 112 activities for improved service delivery Council of Chief Justices Rules Harmonisation Community Stakeholders Engagement Group, 230 Committee, 245 complaints Council of Imams, 234 judicial services, 54, 65 see also Board of Imams Victoria registry services, 60, 65–6 counter enquiries, 3 statistics, 122 family law registries, 62 complaints and feedback form, 65 counter waiting times, 21 complaints and feedback policy, 65 court dates compliance reporting, 122 on Commonwealth Courts Portal, 18 conference presentations and attendance Court Education Committee, 246 family consultants, 30–1, 135 Court Excellence Committee, 28, 245 conferences see papers presented and Court Liaison Committee, 246 conferences, seminars and workshops Court Network Victoria conducted and/or attended Family Law Booklet for CALD communities Connections, 26, 27 (Vietnamese and Dinka), 233 and family consultants’ professional Court performance development re family violence, 30 report on, 39–66 Connections technology, 24 Court Performance Committee, 104, 108, 219 consent orders applications, 41, 48 Court Policy Committee, 28, 105, 110, 219 drafting, 229 Court Reform Bill, 232 consent orders finalised, 3 Court service locations, 16–17

274 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

Court Services Committee, 104, 219 Deakin Law School Court Services portfolio, 110 and delegation of judges from Sri Lanka, 253 Court user satisfaction death of a child or party and International Framework for Court internal review processes on, 113 Excellence, 28

debt collection strategy, 24 INDEXES Court user satisfaction surveys, 28, 232 defamation see action in defamation court-ordered arbitration, 24 Denmark Ministry for Children, Gender Equality, Courts Administration Legislation Amendment Act Integration and Social Affairs 2016, 4, 28, 125 teleconference, 250 Courts Exchange, 116, 117, 216 Department of Family and Community Services, 89 criterion source see under performance criterion Department of Finance Cronin, Hon. Justice Paul Joseph and Adelaide registry Child Dispute Services Melbourne registry, 100 area refurbishment, 112 cross-appeal, 75 and annual ICT benchmarking report, 123 cross-border child access, 8 and cleaning contracts, 216 Cross-border Family Mediation: International Parental and Commonwealth law Courts rent, 137 Child Abduction, Custody and Access Cases, 9 and GovMail and GovDesk, 124 Crown Law services provided free of charge by, 139 and Queensland Department of Communities, and Sydney registry Child Dispute Services Child Safety and Disability Services, 232 area refurbishment, 112 CSSMG community, 24 Department of Finance website cultural awareness training, 231 Small Enterprise participation statistics on, 143 cultural competency eLearning, 32, 68 Department of Health and Human Services cultural competency training, 115 Southern region, 234 cultural diversity see Judicial Council on and Tasmania Family Violence Consultative Cultural Diversity Committee forum, 235 Cultural Diversity sub-committee, 104 and Victorian Royal Commission into Family culturally and linguistically diverse (CALD) Violence, 233 clients, 36, 37, 231 Department of Justice (Safe at Home) Court Network Victoria, Family Law Booklet for and Tasmania Family Violence Consultative CALD communities (Vietnamese and Dinka), 233 Committee forum, 235 see also CALD and African-Australian Department of Social Services communities within Family Law: Access and and Family Law Forum, 225 Equality from a Woman’s Perspective forum Departmental Capital Budget, 139 Depreciation and Amortisation, 137, 139 D Deputy Chief justice Dandenong registry chambers contact details, 256 business continuity desktop scenarios, 118 responsibilities, 98 and CALD and African-Australian communities see also Faulks, Hon. Deputy Chief Justice John within Family Law: Access and Equality from desktop eLearning see eLearning a Woman’s Perspective forum, 234 Director, Human Resources child protection worker co-located at Ethics Contact Officer Network, 120 Melbourne registry and, 233 and public interest disclosure, 120 contact details, 259 see also Golding, Claire counter waiting times, 21 Disability Action Plan, 31, 32 and Department of Health and Human Services – Southern region, 234 disability reporting, 136–7 free legal advice, 234 Diverse WA cultural competency training program new public lift, 112 Western Australian Government Office of Multicultural Interests, 68 Darwin registry divorce contact details, 258 online, 20–1 Dawe, Hon. Justice Christine Elizabeth online proof of, 21, 63 Adelaide registry, 99 see also provisions of proof that divorces Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 were granted

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 275 9

divorce orders employee entitlements expenses, 140 printed and posted to clients, 3, 64 energy document processing usage reduction, 215 family law registries, 62 enquiries see counter enquiries; telephone calls/ enquiries

INDEXES documents eFiled, 3 Doherty, Judge Colin (District Court of New Zealand) Enterprise Agreement, 125–6, 133, 137, 206 and Singapore State Courts Conference, 28 see also Federal Magistrates Court of Australia Domestic Violence NSW and Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement 2011–14 Chief Executive Officer, 136 ‘Enterprise Search’, 26 Domestic Violence: The Legal Services Challenge workshop (Business and Industry Engagement Entity Resource Statement 2015–16, 198 on Domestic Violence Project), 227 environment Dubbo registry Court impacts on, 214 collaborative engagements, 229 measures to minimise, 214–17 contact details, 257 Environment Protection and Biodiversity and NSW Central West Family law Pathways Conservation Act 1999, 214 Network, 229 Environmental Champions Network, 216 Due Diligence training, 211 Environmental Management System, 215, 217 Duncanson, Hon. Justice Susan Janet environmental performance Family Court of WA, 101 review and improvement strategies, 217 Dunne, Antonia Environmental Policy, 214, 217 Australia Day award, 127 Envirosmart, 217 equity see social justice and equity impacts E Ernest & Young early intervention management, 212 review of court’s funding, 124 Eastern region ethical standards, 120 appeals, 73 Ethics Advisory Service, 120 Appeals Registrar, 73 Ethics Contact Officer Network (ECONET) (Australian Public Service Commission), 120 ecologically sustainable development Evaluation of the 2012 Family Violence Amendments Court activities and, 214 (Australian Institute of Family Studies), 6 ecologically sustainable development and Event Based Fees process, 24 environmental performance, 214–17 events after the reporting period, 141 eDivorce pilot at Brisbane registry, 24 Every Child Magazine, 135 eFile an application for divorce?, 21 e-waste, 215 eFiling, 18, 24, 146, 253 Executive Director, Client Services divorce, 21 powers and responsibilities, 103 number of documents, 3, 19 and public interest disclosure, 120 eFiling your family law matter in the Commonwealth Courts Portal (video), 146 Executive Director, Corporate eLearning powers and responsibilities, 103 family consultants’ professional development Executive Director of Corporate Services, 4 re family violence, 30, 136 exempt contracts, 142 induction package, 24 expenses and resources for outcome 1, 199 registrars, 136 external and internal scrutiny, 122–4 see also cultural competency eLearning external evaluations, 124 eLodged PDFs, 18 external involvement, 224–5 emails, 62, 63 sent in response to telephone enquiries, 3 Employee Assistance Program, 137 and Peer Support Network, 93

276 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

F jurisdiction, 13 Fairfield Club Grants management and accountability, 95–145 Legal Matters relating to seniors (part of membership, 12, 96 ‘Vietnamese Senior – Happy and Well for merger of FCC into one administrative body (Family Court and Federal Circuit Court), 13 Life’ project), 229 INDEXES family assessments and reporting see Australian merger of with Federal Court and FCC into Standards of Practice for Family Assessments one administrative body, 124, 125, 141 and Reporting objective/purpose, 2, 12, 14, 40, 70 family consultant training, 134–6 organisational structure, 97 family consultants overview, 11–34 Child Dispute Services, 29, 30 report on performance, 39–66 seminar series, 134 service locations, 16–17 Clinical Induction Program, 135 services, 12 conference presentations and attendance, 135 vision, 2, 12 Melbourne conference, 30–1 year in review, 1–7 national conference, 135 highlights, 3 and Core Knowledge Database, 135 see also Family Court and Federal Circuit Court family violence, 30 Administration information for kids aged 5–8 and 9–12 re, 80–1 Family Court of Western Australia video information, 81 and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander professional development re family violence, Outreach Committee, 111 30–1, 136 appeals from, 55, 73 publications, 135 contact details, 259 s 11F events and interviews, 135 judges, 101 and s 11F interventions/assessments, 30 family law Family Court and Federal Circuit Court funding, 4, 6 cessation of operation, 141 Family Law Act 1975, 85 expenditure, 138 and Australian Institute of Family Studies, 224 categories of, 138–9 and Family Law Council, 224 single non-corporate Commonwealth entity, 137 and FCA, 96 entity purpose, 59 Part X: Appellate jurisdiction of FCA, 72 Portfolio Budget Statements outcome and Part XIIIB: Contempt of Court, 91 program, 13–14, 41, 71 recognition of Aboriginal culture in, 229 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court s 4: Appeal Division, 72 Administration s 11F: Court may order parties to attend, or employee and supplier expenses, 139 arrange for child to attend, appointments objective, 14 with a family consultant, 30, 135 operating expenditure, 137, 140 s 60K: Court to take prompt action in relation categories of, 140–1 to allegations of child abuse or family violence, 57 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Corporate Plan 2015–2019, 40, 42, 59, 60, 70, 71 s 94AA: Leave to appeal needed in some cases, 88 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Portfolio s 95: Appeals to High Court, 79 Budget Statements 2015–16 s 112AP: Contempt, 91 component 1.1.1 key performance indicators, 42, 71 s 121: Restriction on publication of court component 1.1.3 key performance indicators, 60 proceedings, 7, 84 Family Court of Australia (FCA), 12 s 123: Rules of Court, 107, 219 appelate direct expenditure, 138 ss 21A, 22(2AA), (2AB) and (2AC): Appeal Division, 71 budget, 7 Family Law Advisory Group direct expenditure, 138 and Family Law Forum, 225 and family law registries, 7 Family Law Amendment (Arbitration and Other and Federal Circuit Court, 4 Measures) Rules 2015, 24, 107 financial statements, 147–96 Family Law and Child Protection: collaboration goal, 2, 12 or confusion, 227

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 277 9

Family Law (Child Abduction) Regulations 1986, 89, 90 and Family Court, 4 Family Law Committee, 227 and Family Law Forum, 225 Family Law Council, 224, 245 and Family Violence Committee, 113 and Family Law Forum, 225 and Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113

INDEXES Interim Report to the Attorney-General merger of FCA into one administrative body in Response to the First Two Terms of (Family Court and Federal Circuit Court), 13 Reference on Families with Complex Needs merger of with FCA and Federal Court into and the Intersection of the Family Law and one administrative body, 124, 125, 141 Child Protection Systems, 6 and NEC, 4 Family Law Duty Lawyers stakeholders annual objective, 14 meeting, 232 and registries, 4 Family Law Forum, 225 see also Family Court and Federal Circuit Court Family Law Practitioners Association, 245 Administration conference, 245 Federal Circuit Court Rules 2001 family law registries, 61–2 subpoena management, 24 Family Court and, 7 Federal Court of Australia functions, 61 and Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Family Law Rules 2004 merger of with FCA and FCC into one amendments to, 107, 232 administrative body, 124, 125 Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia, Federal Court of Australia’s Corporate Services Unit, 4 107, 224, 225 federal family law jurisdictions and Family Law Forum, 225 collaborative relationship of with state child Family Law Settlement Service, 226, 228 welfare authorities, 233 family relationship centres, 228, 229, 230 Federal Magistrates Court, 4 Family Relationships Advice Line, 63 Federal Magistrates Court of Australia and family reports see Australian Standards of Practice Family Court of Australia Enterprise Agreement for Family Assessments and Reporting 2011–14, 125, 132, 133, 137, 206 family violence and abuse (or risk), 5, 13, 57–8 classification structure and pay rates, 209 community engagement, 6 fee payment definition, 57 online, 18 professional development, 30–1 see also debt collection strategy; Event Based Family Violence Best Practice Principles, 113 Fees process Family Violence Committee, 24, 113 feedback and service improvements, 122 family violence education, 6 see also client feedback and complaints Family Violence Plan, 31, 32, 136 management Family Violence Plan 2014–16, 113 Fenwick, Stewart family violence reporting, 29 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group, 114, 220 family violence screening, 30, 135 Fiji Women’s Rights Movement, 250 family violence strategy, 113 filings, 5 Faukland & Shikia Filippello, Angela, 102 [2016] FamCAFC 83 (Bryant CJ, Ryan and Murphy JJ) – delivered 25 May 2016, 91–2 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group, 114, 220 Faulks, Hon. Deputy Chief Justice John, 98 Family Violence Committee, 113 Appeal Division, 99 Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Canberra registry, 99 retirement of, 4 Court Policy Committee, 105 see also Principal Registrar retirement of, 5, 226 final orders applications, 41, 43, 44, 47 see also Deputy Chief justice finalisations Federal Circuit Court Act 1999, 84, 85 number of, 46 Federal Circuit Court of Australia (FCC) finalised appeals and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee, 111 age of, 78 appeals from, 55, 72, 73, 75–6 finalised applications budget, 7 age of, 52–3 direct expenditure, 139 see also applications for final orders

278 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

Finance Committee, 104, 106, 219 G financial cases, 13 Galvao, Manuela financial management, 137–41 and Board of Imams Victoria, 250 financial risk, 118 Garrard, Phillip financial statements, 147–96 National Consultative Committee, 222 INDEXES Finn, Hon. Justice Mary Madeleine gender dysphoria in children Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 stage two treatment for, 5 Appeal Division, 71, 99 Ghadas, Prof Dr Zuhairah Ariff Abd, 253 Canberra registry, 99 Ghazel & Ghazel and Anor retirement of, 5 [2016] FamCAFC 31 (Finn, May and Austin JJ) – First Aid Officer Network, 211 delivered 4 March 2016, 86–7 first instance judgments published, 3 Gill, Hon. Justice Shane first instance trials, 46 appointment, 101, 102, 226 FitzGibbon, Senior Registrar John Canberra Registry, 5, 99 Rules Committee, 107 Gold Coast Family Law Pathways Network, 232 Forrest, Hon. Justice Colin Golding, Claire Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Brisbane registry, 99, 246 Group, 114 Court Policy Committee, 105 National Consultative Committee, 222 Court Services Committee, 219 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 and Queensland Courts’ Aboriginal and see also Director, Human Resources Torres Strait Islander Justice Committee, 246 governance and communication and Timor Leste, 246 and International Framework for Court Foster, Hon. Justice Garry Frederick Excellence, 28 Parramatta registry, 100 GovMail and GovDesk Inter-Agency Working Group, 124 Foster PSM FAIM, Richard, 102 Graduate Diploma Family Dispute Resolution Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory (Institute of Family Practice), 228 Group, 220 grants programs, 218 Court Policy Committee, 105 Greater Newcastle Family Law Pathways Network, 230 retirement of, 4 Greater Sydney Family Law Pathways Network, 226, see also Chief Executive Officer 228, 229 Frankel, Professor Douglas and Hague mediations and The Hague H Convention Mediation Project, 247 Hague Co-Mediation model, 253 fraud Hague Convention on Celebration and incidents of, 119 Recognition of the Validity of Marriages, 87 fraud control certification, 119 Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Fraud Control Plan, 117 Child Abduction, 5, 9, 13, 46, 89, 247, 255 Fraud Control Plan 2015–16, 119 Hague mediations and The Hague Convention Fraud Control Plan 2016–17, 118 Mediation Project, 247 fraud prevention and control, 118–19 Haneda, Keiko, 9 fraud risk treatments, 115 Hannam, Hon. Justice Hilary Rae Freedom of Information Act 1982, 119 Family Violence Committee, 113 Freedom of Information requests, 119, 122 Parramatta registry, 100 fringe benefit expenses, 140 Harmony Day 2016, 36–7 Fringe Benefit Tax liabilities, 140 Hartley, Brian front line services Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 family violence, 6 Hazard Notification and Report Form, 211 Fujitsu Health and Safety Representative Network, 211 and judicial information technology Henderson, Bernadette requirements, 112 National Consultative Committee, 222 Full Court, 72 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 sittings, 72 High Court of Australia Full Court appeals, 55, 72 appeals to, 79

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 279 9

and Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Information Publication Scheme, 119 High Tech Challenge (South Australian information technology Government), 231 and energy usage reduction, 215 Hobart registry see also judicial information technology business continuity desktop scenarios, 118 requirements INDEXES contact details, 259 information technology initiatives, 18–23 judges, 100, 245 information technology services Hogan, Hon. Justice Jenny Deyell expenditure, 140 Brisbane registry, 99 InPSYCH, 135 Rules Committee, 107 Inquiry into Domestic and Family Violence Honourable Society of the Inner Temple London, 245 Social Development Committee How do I ...? (South Australian Parliament), 6 on website, 26 Inquiry into Domestic Violence in Australia, 6 divorce, 21 Institute of Family Practice HR information bulletins, 116 Graduate Diploma Family Dispute Resolution, 228 HR Newsletter, 211 Interim Report to the Attorney-General in Response Hughes, Judge Kate to the First Two Terms of Reference on Families with Complex Needs and the Intersection of the Family Violence Committee, 113 Family Law and Child Protection Systems (Family Hughes v Australian Competition & Consumer Law Council), 6 Commission [2004] FCAFC 319, 92 internal audit, 115, 117 human resources management, 125–6 Internal Audit Plan, 115, 117 Human Resources section internal communication initiatives, 26–7 Corporate Services Division, 125 internal evaluations, 124 Hungary, 246 International Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers, 245 Hunter Valley Family Law Conference, 230 International Association of Court Administration, 245 Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Association, 230 International Bar Association I Judges Forum, 245 international child abduction and access cases, 8, 13 IBM Connections see Connections see also Hague Convention on the Civil Ibrahim, Dr Norliah, 253 Aspects of International Child Abduction Imams see Board of Imams Victoria; Council of Imams international collaboration Imlach, Lyn and International Framework for Court Harmony Day award, 37 Excellence, 28 Independent Children’s Lawyer conference, 245 International Consortium Resources website, 28 independent children’s lawyers, 9, 110 international cooperation, 33–4 Independent Children’s Lawyers User Group international family law, 5 Committee, 246 International Framework for Court Excellence, 7, 28 India and access and inclusion framework, 31 Flavia Agnes from, 251 Family Violence Screening Tool Pilot, 115 Indigenous Action Plan, 31, 32 and judicial committees, 104 Indigenous Action Plan 2014–16, 111 International Hague Network of Judges, 9, 246 Indigenous employment, 132 international visitors, 250–5 Indigenous Family Liaison Officers Interpreters and Translation Services Panel, 232 expenditure, 141 Intervention Order, 231 individual flexibility arrangements, 133, 207 intranet messages, 117 Indonesia intranet upgrade, 26 cooperation with, 33–4 Israel information and communications technology (ICT) visit of and judicial officer from to Melbourne benchmarking report, 123 registry, 233 supply contracts, 123 IT infrastructure improvements, 23 whole-of-government initiatives, 123–4 Italy Information and Referral Service visiting judge from, 251 (Sydney City Family Relationship Centre), 226

280 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

J judicial committees, 104–5, 219–20 Jacobs, Susan (US Ambassador), 247 Judicial Complaints Advisor, 65 Janssen & Janssen judicial complaints procedure, 65 [2015] FamCAFC 168 (Strickland, Ryan and judicial conduct

Aldridge JJ) – delivered on 4 September 2015, complaints about, 65 INDEXES 84–5 Judicial Conference of Australia, 245 Japan Judicial Council on Cultural Diversity, 112, 246 Australian delegation to, 9 judicial delays CHUO Summer School 2016 (students from complaints about, 65 Japan), 234, 246 Judicial Education Committee, 245 delegations from and visits to, 251–2 judicial information technology requirements, 104, 112 visit to Parramatta registry, 229 see also information technology initiatives see also Australia–Japan collaboration judicial officers, 98, 132, 204 Japan Co-Mediation Program, 8–9, 252–3 Judicial Officers Aboriginal Cultural Awareness Japan Delegation Committee, 246 Committee, 246 Jenkins, Kevin judicial services, 41, 59, 71 National Consultative Committee, 222 annual performance statement, 40–58 Jess and Ors & Jess and Ors (2014) FLC, 93–620, 88 analysis of performance against purpose, Johannesen, Greg 43–54 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 national coverage as appellate court, 55 Johns, Hon. Justice Sharon Louise results, 40–2 and Board of Imams Victoria, 250 social justice and equity impacts, 55–8 Melbourne registry, 100, 250 summary of performance against KPIs, 42 Johnston, Hon. Justice William Phillip judicial services complaints, 54 Sydney registry, 100 jurisdiction, 13 Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Justice of the Peace service, 231 Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade K and human rights issues confronting women and Katrib, Gloria girls in the Indian Ocean-Asia Pacific region, 33 Harmony Day award, 37 judges, 99–101 Kaur, Rasheel education program for, 109 and Board of Imams Victoria, 250 role of, 96 Kaye AM, Hon. Stephen William, 246 see also case management judges Kelso, Simon judges assigned to Appeal Division, 99 Audit and Risk Committee, 221 Judges’ Pension Scheme, 137 Kent, Hon. Justice Michael Patrick judgments see significant and noteworthy Appeal Division, 5, 72, 99 judgments appointment to, 102 judicial activities, 236–44 Brisbane registry, 99 Chief Justice, 236–9 key performance indicators (KPIs) papers presented and conferences, seminars FCA, 40, 59, 70, 71, 121 and workshops conducted and/or attended judicial services, 42 Chief Justice, 236–7 NEC, 61, 63, 64 judges, 239–44 registry services, 60, 61 judicial appointments, 5 Kids Helpline, 80, 110 see also appointments, retirements and Kiesewetter, Sybille, 9 resignations Korea, Republic of Judicial Commission of NSW Child Support Agency, 229, 253 and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee, 111 Kyaw, Khin Myo Myo Su, 253 judicial committee highlights, 106–13

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 281 9

L Family Violence Committee, 113 Lamb, Patrick and Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade (JSCFADT), 33 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 visit to Vietnam re Vietnam legal system, 255 Launceston registry litigants’ representation status, 56 INDEXES contact details, 259 see also legal representation; unrepresented Law Centre litigants and Flavia Agnes on women’s rights in context Live Chat, 22, 60, 62 of family breakdown in India, 234 contact details, 256 Law Council of Australia live chats Family Law Section, 107, 224, 225 average per day, 3 and Family Law Forum, 225 LK v Director-General Department of Community International Parental Child Abduction Legal Services (2009) 232 ClR 582, 90 Resource, 247 local pathways groups or networks, 225 National Advisory Council local registry consultations and other activities Family Law Section, 245 for improved service delivery, 225–35 Law Institute of Victoria see also community relationships and Courts Practise Committee, 246 consultation family law section, 232 Lojszczyk, Di Law Reform and Legislation Committee, 104 Family Violence Committee, 113 Law Society of New South Wales Loughnan, Hon. Justice Ian James and Family Law Settlement Service, 228 Rules Committee, 107 Law Society of South Australia, 246 Sydney registry, 100 Le Poer Trench, Hon. Justice Mark Frederick Sydney registry, 100 M Unrepresented Litigants Working Group, 111 McClelland, Justice Robert Bruce Unrepresented Litigants Working Party, 225 and National Judicial College of Australia’s Lee, Sun Hee, 253 ‘Self-Represented Litigants and Accused: legal aid, 63 International Perspectives’ online seminar Legal Aid Commission Tasmania, 235 program, 246 Legal Aid Court Ordered Mediation Program, 226 and NSW Bar Practice Course ‘Day with Legal Aid Family Law Duty Service, 226 Judges’ component, 246 Legal Aid Queensland, 232 and NSW Legal Aid Family Law Conference, 246 Legal Associates Professional Development Sydney registry, 100, 246 Program, 247 and University of New South Wales, 246 Legal Education seminars, 226 McCulloch, Jim, 253 legal identity documents in Indonesia, 34 Macmillan, Hon. Justice Kirsty Marion Legal Matters relating to seniors (part of ‘Vietnamese Melbourne registry, 100 Senior – Happy and Well for Life’ project), 229 Magellan cases, 13, 58, 108, 226 legal representation Magellan Committee, 225 use of, 55 and Family Law Forum, 225 Legal Services Commission, 231 see also New South Wales Magellan Steering Let’s talk Cultural Competence eLearning, 68 Committee letter of transmittal, iii Magellan protocol, 108 Lifeline Magellan Stakeholders Group, 232 accidental Counsellor, 93 Magistrates Court of Victoria Lismore registry Family Violence Taskforce, 246 contact details, 257 Magistrates Court of Western Australia local family law practitioners associations and appeals from, 72 Pathways groups, 232 Malaysia Lister, Leisha delegation from, 253 and Board of Imams Victoria, 250 Malaysian Legal Aid, 229 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Malta IV Conference on Cross-Frontier Child Group, 114, 220 Protection and Family Law, 247 Court Policy Committee, 105

282 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

management and accountability, 95–145 and Sri Lankan Supreme Court delegation, 233 Manager Assistance Program, 137 and Thornbury High Indigenous Students, 234 market research see advertising and market and Victoria Pathways, 233 research and Victoria University Internship Program, 234 Marriage Act 1961, 13, 86, 87

and Victorian Legal Aid Commission, 232 INDEXES Marriage Amendment Act 2004, 86, 87 and Victorian Royal Commission into Family marriages and births in Indonesia Violence, 233 registration of, 33, 34 visit by delegation from Malaysia, 253 Marrickville Women’s Refuge, 226 Melbourne University see Asia Law Centre, Marshal and Security Services University of Melbourne expenditure, 140 mental health issues, 13 Mathieson, John Mental Health Support Plan, 31, 32 Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Mental Illness and Children in Family Law and May, Hon. Justice Michelle Engaging with Perpetrators of Family Violence forum, 233 Appeal Division, 5, 71, 99 Moncrieff, Hon. Justice Simon and Australasian Institute of Judicial Administration, 245 Family Court of WA, 101 and Australian Academy of Law, 245 Morgan, Jane and Australian Association of Women Judges, 245 National Consultative Committee, 222 and Bar Association of Queensland, 245 Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 Brisbane registry, 99, 245 Moroni, Magistrate Alan Court Policy Committee, 105 Rules Committee, 107 and International Academy of Matrimonial Multicultural Plan, 31, 32, 115 Lawyers, 245 Murphy, Hon. Justice Peter John and Judges Forum of the International Bar Appeal Division, 72, 99 Association, 245 Brisbane registry, 99, 245 and Legal Associates Professional Development and College of Law’s Applied Family Law Program, 247 Advisory Committee, 245 Mediator’s Assessment of Safety Issues and Concerns Court Excellence Committee, 245 Practitioner Version 2, 30 and Court Excellence Committee, 28 Medlow & Medlow and Family law Practitioners Association, 245 [2016] FamCAFC 34 (May, Ryan and Aldridge JJ) and Family Law Section of the Law Council of – delivered on 8 March 2016, 88 Australia’s National Advisory Council, 245 Melbourne registry and International Association of Court asset and property projects, 143 Administration, 245 child protection worker co-located at and Judicial Conference of Australia, 245 Dandenong registry and, 233 Judicial Education Committee, 245 and CHUO Summer School 2016 and judicial information technology (students from Japan), 234 requirements, 104, 112 contact details, 259 and National Judicial College of Australia’s and Council of Imams, 234 Judgment Writing Committee, 245 counter waiting times, 21 and Queensland Bar Association, 245 and Court Network Victoria, Family and Singapore State Courts Conference, 28 Law Booklet for CALD communities and World Congress on Family Law and (Vietnamese and Dinka), 233 Children’s Rights, 245 and family law section of Law Institute of Muslim legal aid liaison officers, 227 Victoria, 232 Myanmar and Family Law Section of Victorian Bar, 232 delegation from, 253 and Flavia Agnes on women’s rights in context Myanmar fellows, 226 of family breakdown in India, 234 judges, 100, 246, 250 and judicial officer from Israel, 233 and Mental Illness and Children in Family Law and Engaging with Perpetrators of Family Violence forum, 233

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 283 9

N New South Wales Civil and Administrative Tribunal, 229 NAIDOC Week 2015, 231 New South Wales Department of Family and Community Services, 226, 229 National Calendar project, 108 New South Wales Law Society, 226 National Center for State Courts and Unrepresented Litigants Working Group, 111 INDEXES and United Nations Development Programme Juvenile Court Project in Trinidad and New South Wales Legal Aid, 225, 228 Tobago, 254 Child Support Service, 253 National Consultative Committee, 114, 115, 125, 222 Family Law Conference, 246 national coverage as appellate court, 55 New South Wales Legal Aid Court Ordered National Disability Strategy 2010–2020, 136 Mediation Program, 228 National Enquiry Centre (NEC) New South Wales Legal Aid Early Intervention Unit, 228 and Application for Divorce Kit, 21 New South Wales Magellan Steering Committee, 226 and Connections, 27 New South Wales Police, 226 contact details, 256 New South Wales Vietnamese Women’s Association, 229 emails, 62, 63 New Zealand, 247 and Family Relationships Advice Line, 63 Newcastle registry and Federal Circuit Court of Australia, 4 asset and property projects, 145 functions and responsibilities, 60, 62 collaborative engagements, 229 and Live Chat, 62 contact details, 257 performance and Greater Newcastle Family Law Pathways KPIs, 64 Network, 230 summary of, 63–4 and Hunter Valley Family Law Practitioners Portal support, 62, 63 Association, 230 telephone calls, 3, 60, 62, 63 judges, 100 National Independent Children’s Lawyers’ replacement of air conditioning and other Conference, 110 improvements, 112 National Institute for Trial Advocacy (USA), 245 and University of Newcastle, 230 National Judicial College ‘no-cash’ registry environment, 24 and Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander non-salary benefits, 134, 208 Outreach Committee, 111 northern region National Judicial College of Australia, 109, 245, 246 Appeals Registrar, 73 National Judicial Orientation Program, 246 Northern Territory National Legal Aid Court service locations, 16–17 and Family Law Forum, 225 registry contact details, 258 National Support Office see also South Australia/Northern Territory contact details, 256 Notice of Appeals Japanese visitors to, 252, 253 filed, finalised and pending, 73–5 National Work Health and Safety Committee, 116, 211 Notice of Child Abuse, Family Violence or Risk of see also Work Health and Safety Committee Family Violence, 57 New South Wales Nozawa, Hidekazu, 253 Court service locations, 16–17 registry contact details, 257–8 O New South Wales/Australian Capital Territory Oberto, Justice Giacomo, 251 consultations and other activities to improve O’Brien, Hon. Justice Richard service delivery, 225–30 appointment, 101, 102 New South Wales Bar Association Family Court of WA, 101 and Family Law Settlement Service, 228 Office for Children, Youth and Family Support, 227 and Unrepresented Litigants Working Group, 111 Ohmachi, Yoshiko, 253 New South Wales Bar Practice Course ‘Day with Judges’ component, 246 Okada, Judge Taku, 252, 253 New South Wales Central West Family Law operating result, 138 Pathways Network, 229 operating revenue and expenses, 137

284 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

organisational structure of FCA, 97 Peer Support Network, 93 outcome 1, 13, 41, 71 pending (active) appeals, 73 expenses and resources for, 199 pending applications Overseas Development Institute age of, 49–50

and evaluation of the role of civil society in pending reserved judgments see reserved INDEXES justice reform in Indonesia, 34 judgments outstanding overview of the Court, 11–34 performance criterion appeals, 70–1 P criterion source, 71 Pagone, Hon. Justice Tony, 251 result against performance criterion, 71–3 paper judicial services, 40–2 usage reduction, 215–16 criterion source, 42 papers presented and conferences, seminars and result against performance criterion, 42 workshops conducted and/or attended registry services, 59–60 Chief Justice, 236–7 criterion source, 60 judges, 239–44 result against performance criterion, 60–1 parenting cases, 13 Performance Management and Development Parramatta Region Family Law Interagency, 229 Scheme, 125 Parramatta registry performance of Court, 39–66 and Aboriginal Legal Service, 228 performance pay arrangements, 134, 208 and Aboriginal services, 229 Phelan, Andrew and Australasian Institute of Judicial Joint Costs Advisory Committee, 113 Administration conference, 229 Philip C Jessup International law Moot Court collaborative engagements, 228–9 Competition, 227 contact details, 257 Police and Justice Support Program in Vanuatu, 255 counter waiting times, 21 Portal see Commonwealth Courts Portal and Family Law Settlement Service, 228 Portfolio Budget Statements and family relationship centres, 229 key performance indicators, 40, 59, 70, 121 and Greater Sydney Family Law Pathways see also key performance indicators (KPIs) Network, 228, 229 Outcome and Program judges, 100 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, and Malaysian Legal Aid, 229 13–14, 41 and NSW Civil and Administrative Tribunal, 229 Practice Direction No. 6 of 2003 and NSW Legal Aid, 228 and divorce applications, 20 and NSW Legal Aid Court Ordered Mediation President of Children’s Court Program, 228 and Victorian Royal Commission into and NSW Legal Aid Early Intervention Unit, 228 Family Violence, 233 and NSW Vietnamese Women’s Association, 229 Principal, Child Dispute Services and Parramatta Region Family Law Interagency, 229 expenditure, 140 placement of social work student in, 229 powers and responsibilities, 103 and Republic of Korea Child Support Agency, see also Reynolds, Jane 229, 253 Principal Registrar visit of Japanese delegation, 229 and Chief Executive Officer visit of Japanese judge to, 252, 253 combined roles of, 4 and Western Sydney educational institutions, 229 powers and responsibilities, 102 and Western Sydney legal profession, 228 see also Filippello, Angela Pascoe AC CVO, John see Chief Judge Procurement and Risk Management section, 118, 142 Patel, Rupal Procurement Framework, 142 Australia Day award, 128 procurement initiatives to support small business, 143 Pathways, 225, 230 productivity gains, 137 Pathways South Australia professional associations pilot of a Children’s Advisory Board, 111 membership of, 248–9 Paxton, Registrar Jenny professional development Rules Committee, 107 family violence, 30–1

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 285 9

Professional Development and Judicial Welfare R Committee, 104, 109, 220 Reconciliation Action Plan, 111 professional legal development, 245–7 toolkit, 112 program 1.1, 14, 41, 71 recycling, 215, 216 property INDEXES Rees, Hon. Justice Judith Anne and environmental impact minimisation, 217 Rules Committee, 107, 219 property and library services received free of charge, 139 Sydney registry, 100 property management, 112 Regional Registry Manager Sydney Property Management sub-committee, 104 and public interest disclosure, 120 property matters, 5 Regional Registry Managers provisions of proof that divorces were granted, 3 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Public Governance, Performance and Group, 114, 220 Accountability Act 2013 (PGPA Act) registrar training, 136 and annual performance statements of registries, 12 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court administration, 59 and Federal Circuit Court of Australia, 4 and annual performance statements of FCA, 40, 70 see also Court service locations; family law registries and Audit and Risk Committee, 115 registry managers compliance with, 117 and community relationship building, 25 Family Court and Federal Circuit Court as non-corporate Commonwealth entity under, registry services, 41, 59, 71 13, 106, 124, 137 administration s 19: Duty to keep responsible Minister and expenditure, 141 Finance Minister informed, 122 annual performance statement, 59–66 Public Governance, Performance and analysis of performance against purpose, 61–4 Accountability Rule 2014 client feedback and complaints s 17: Audit committee for Commonwealth management, 65–6 entities, 115 results, 59–61 Public Interest Disclosure, 120 summary of performance against KPIs, 61 Public Interest Disclosure Act 2013, 120 client service Public Interest Disclosure Rules, 120 expenditure, 141 Public Interest Disclosure Standards, 120 family consultant Public Service Act 1999 expenditure, 141 and APS Values and Code of Conduct, 120 Indigenous Family Liaison Officers s 24(1): determination 24 instruments, 133, 207 expenditure, 141 purchasing, consultants and contracts, 142–3 registrars expenditure, 141 Q Registry Services Delivery Strategy, 24, 116 Queensland registry services initiatives, 24–5 consultations and other activities to improve registry wait numbers in real time, 21 service delivery, 231–2 Rehabilitation Management System, 210, 211, 212 Court service locations, 16–17 Rehabilitation Management System and registry contact details, 258 Framework, 117 Queensland Bar Association, 245 Relationships Australia, 227, 231 Queensland Courts’ Aboriginal and Religious Courts of Indonesia, 34 Torres Strait Islander Justice Committee, 246 Remuneration Tribunal Queensland Department of Communities, and judicial officers, 132 Child Safety and Disability Services, 232 reserved judgments delivered and Crown Law, 232 age of, 53–4 Queensland Department of Justice and reserved judgments outstanding Attorney-General, 232 age of, 50–1 Queensland State Magistrates Court, 231 retention strategies, 126–7 Queensland University of Technology Bar retirements see appointments, retirements and Practice course, 232 resignations

286 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9

rewards and recognition, 127–31 Seymour College, 231 Reynolds, Jane, 103 shared property expenses, 139 Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory significant and noteworthy judgments, 83–92 Group, 114, 220 Simon, Dr Robert see also Principal, Child Dispute Services

and family consultants’ conference INDEXES Risk Control and Compliance Framework, 118 (Melbourne), 30 risk management, 118 Simons, Jaime Rockhampton registry Work Health and Safety Committee, 223 contact details, 258 Singapore, 247 local family law practitioners associations Singapore State Courts Conference, 28 and Pathways groups, 232 Sir Zelman Cowen Centre, 250 RSM Bird Cameron small business and Audit and Risk Committee, 221 procurement initiatives to support, 143 and internal audit, 117 Survey of Australian Government Payments to, 143 and Rehabilitation Management System, 212 Smith, Caroline Ruddock MP, Hon. Philip and Asia Pacific Symposium on the 1980 and Joint Standing Committee on Hague Convention (Tokyo), 9 Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade Social Development Committee Human Rights sub-committee, 33 (South Australian Parliament) Rules Committee, 104, 107, 219 Inquiry into Domestic and Family Violence, 6 Rutherford and Rutherford (1991) FLC 92–225, 88 social justice and equity impacts, 55–8 Ryan, Hon. Justice Judith Maureen Soden, Warwick G., 40, 59, 70, 119 Appeal Division, 72, 99 Soe, Tin Nwe, 253 Court Policy Committee, 105 ‘The Source’ (intranet), 26 Family Violence Committee, 113 South Australia Rules Committee, 107, 219 Court service locations, 16–17 Sydney registry, 100 registry contact details, 259 South Australia/Northern Territory S consultations and other activities to improve safe and healthy work environment, 126 service delivery, 230–1 Safe Home, Safe Families: Tasmania’s South Australian Biannual Pathways CEO briefing, 231 Family Violence Action Plan 2015–2020, 235 South Australian Family Law Pathways Kiosk, 230 safety planning processes, 24 South Australian Living Arts Festival, 231 Safety, Rehabilitation and Compensation Act 1988, 210 South Australian Magistrates Court Secretary, Department of Family and Community electronic database, 231 Services & Padwa South Australian Parliament [2016] FamCAFC 57 (Cryant CJ, Murphy and Social Development Committee, 6 Kent JJ) – delivered 15 April 2016, 89–90 South Australian Police call centre staff training, 231 seminar series for family consultants, judges and southern region family lawyers (Child Dispute Services), 134 Appeals Registrar, 73 Senate estimates committee hearings, 124 Southport Magistrates Court Senate Finance and Public Administration specialist domestic violence court pilot, 232 Committee special medical procedures Inquiry into Domestic Violence, 113 applications related to, 5 Senate Finance and Public Administration Sri Lanka References Committee delegation of judges from, 253 Inquiry into Domestic Violence in Australia, 6 Stace, Paul, 103 Senior Executive Service (SES) staff Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory remuneration, 133 Group, 114, 220 and Senate estimates committee hearings, 124 staff senior executives, 102–3, 114 guidance for, 116 senior management committees, 114–16, 220–3 staff rewards and recognition, 127–31 Service Charter and Service Commitments, 116, staffing, 116 120, 121

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 287 9

staffing profile, 132, 200–4 and Legal Aid Court Ordered Mediation stage two treatment for gender dysphoria in Program, 226 children, 5 and Legal Aid Family Law Duty Service, 226 standing committees, 219–20 and NSW Magellan Steering Committee, 226 state child welfare authorities and Police and Justice Support Program in INDEXES collaborative relationship of with federal family Vanuatu, 255 law jurisdictions, 233 visit of delegation from Myanmar, 253 Statement of Strategic Intent, 116 visit of delegation from Vanuatu, 226 Stevenson, Hon. Justice Janine Patricia Hazelwood and Women’s Family Law Support Service, 226 Administrative Appeals Tribunal, 101 Family Violence Committee, 113 T Sydney registry, 100 Takuya, Mr, 253 Storti, Maria Tasmania Audit and Risk Committee, 221 consultations and other activities to improve strategic risk, 115 service delivery, 235 Strategic Risk Management Plan, 117 Court service locations, 16–17 Strickland, Hon. Justice Steven Andrew registry contact details, 259 and Adelaide Law School GDLP Advocacy see also Victoria/Tasmania Coaching Clinics, 246 Tasmania Family Violence Consultative Committee Adelaide registry, 99, 245 forum, 235 Appeal Division, 71, 99 Tasmania Police and Australian Chapter of the Association of and Tasmania Family Violence Consultative Family and Conciliation Courts, 245 Committee forum, 235 and Australian Institute of Family Law Tasmanian Centre for Legal Studies Arbitrators and Mediators, 245 Legal Practice Course, 245 and Council of Chief Justices Rules Tasmanian Young Lawyers Group, 235 Harmonisation Committee, 245 telephone calls/enquiries, 60, 62, 63, 64 and Law Society of South Australia, 246 emails sent in response to, 3 sub-committees, 110–13 Thackray, Hon. Justice Stephen Ernest subpoena management, 24 (Chief Judge Family Court of WA), 101 summary workload Appeal Division, 71, 99 judicial services, 43–4 Thailand Supreme Court of Indonesia, 33, 34 roundtable discussions in re Australia-Asia Supreme People’s Court of Vietnam Program to Combat Trafficking in Persons, 254 and FCA visit to Vietnam re Vietnam legal Thornbury High Indigenous students, 234, 246 system, 255 Thornton, Hon. Justice Christine Survey of Australian Government Payments to Melbourne registry, 100 Small Business, 143 Timor Leste, 246 Sydney City Family Relationship Centre total applications files, 3 Information and Referral Service, 226 Townsville registry Sydney registry asset and property projects, 143 asset and property projects, 145 business continuity desktop scenarios, 118 Child Dispute Services area refurbishment, 112 contact details, 258 collaborative engagements, 225–6 judges, 100 contact details, 257 training, learning and development, 134–6 counter waiting times, 21 see also client service and chambers training; and Greater Sydney Family Law Pathways cultural competency training; Due Diligence Network, 226 training; family consultant training; and Information and Referral Service registrar training (Sydney City Family Relationship Centre), 226 Tran, Dinh judges, 100, 245, 246 National Consultative Committee, 222

288 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA 9 transparency, 7 V travel Vanuatu and environmental impact minimisation, 217 delegation from, 255 Treasury website Sydney registry, 226

Survey of Australian Government Payments Victoria INDEXES to Small Business on, 143 Court service locations, 16–17 Tree, Hon. Justice Peter William registry contact details, 259 Townsville registry, 100 Victoria Legal Aid ‘trial docket’ system of case management, 108 and Victorian Royal Commission into Trinidad and Tobago, 246 Family Violence, 233 United Nations Development Programme Victoria Pathways, 233 Juvenile Court Project in, 254 Victoria Police Tuff, Christine and Victorian Royal Commission into Australia Day award, 128 Family Violence, 233 Twitter, 22 Victoria/Tasmania consultations and other activities to improve U service delivery, 232–4 UNICEF Victoria University Internship Program, 234, 248 and FCA visit to Vietnam re Vietnam legal Victorian Bar system, 255 Family Law Section, 232 United Kingdom, 247 Victorian Department of Health and Human Services United Nations and child protection worker co-located at Convention on the Rights of the Child, 255 Melbourne and Dandenong registries, 233 United Nations Development Programme Juvenile Victorian Family Law Pathways Network, 234 Court Project in Trinidad and Tobago, 254 and CALD and African-Australian communities United Nations International Day for the Elimination within Family Law: Access and Equality from of Racial Discrimination, 36 a Woman’s Perspective forum, 234 United States, 247 Victorian Legal Aid Commission, 232, 233 Uniting Care post separation service providers Victorian Royal Commission into Family Violence, 6, and Child Dispute Services, 232 113, 233 University of Melbourne Vietnam Asia Law Centre visit to re Vietnam legal system, 255 and Flavia Agnes on women’s rights in context voluntary arbitration, 24 of family breakdown in India, 234, 251 and Council of Imams, 234 W see also Asia Law Centre, University of Walters, Hon. Justice John Myer Melbourne Family Court of WA, 101 University of New South Wales, 246 Wareham, Neil University of Newcastle, 230 Rules Committee, 107 University of Pennsylvania, 247 waste/cleaning, 216 University of South Australia, 231 Watts, Hon. Justice Garry Allan University of Tasmania, 245 Finance Committee, 106 Law School, 235 Sydney registry, 100 University of Technology, Sydney, 245 Web Accessibility National Transition Strategy, 124 unrepresented applicants Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, 124 appeals, 5 websites unrepresented litigants, 55–6 complaints and feedback form on, 65 Unrepresented Litigants Working Group, 110, 111 decisions published on, 84 Unrepresented Litigants Working Party, 225 eFiling video on, 146 User Satisfaction Survey 2015, 7 new material for children on, 31 and Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.0, 124

ANNUAL REPORT 15/16 289 9

Western Australia Family Court of Western Australia contact details, 259 Western Australian Government

INDEXES Office of Multicultural Interests Diverse WA cultural competency training program, 68 Western Australian Integrated Court Management System, 231 whole-of-government Information, Communication and Technology (ICT) initiatives, 123–4 wikis and Connections, 27 Wollongong registry collaborative engagements, 225–6 contact details, 258 women and girls in the Indian Ocean-Asia Pacific region human rights issues confronting, 33 Women’s Family Law Support Service, 226 Women’s Legal Centre, 227 Women’s Legal Service, 136, 232 work environment see safe and healthy work environment work health and safety, 210–12 Work Health and Safety Act 2011, 210 Work Health and Safety Committee, 114, 223 see also National Work Health and Safety Committee Work Health and Safety Management Plan, 210, 211 Work Health and Safety Risk Assessment Guidelines, 211 Work Health and Safety Strategic Plan 2014–2016, 210, 211 workers’ compensation, 212 Workforce and Policy Manager Ethics Contact Officer Network, 120 workforce planning, 126 workforce turnover, 132, 205 workload issues, 5 see also summary workload workplace diversity, 127 World Congress on Family Law and Children’s Rights, 245

Y years of service awards, 131 Yourtown – Kids’ Helpline, 110 YouTube, 23, 146

290 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA ANNUAL REPORT 15/ 16 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA