County CouRt of VICtoRIA AnnuAl RepoRt
2008-09 This report provides a summary of the County Court’s strategic priorities, major projects and achievements for FY2008-09.
mission, vALues AnD Key Achievements
he County Court of Victoria (the Court) • Promote organisational excellence through represents the intermediate tier of the state’s procedural reform court hierarchy. It is the largest trial court in t • Recognise that our people are important the state of Victoria. ouR vision Key Achievements FoR 2008-09 The Court’s strategic priorities are outlined in the Our vision is to be a leader in providing a high quality, Annual Business Plan. The Court’s key achievements accessible and effi cient court system which ensures justice for 2008-09 are summarised below. for all at least cost to court users and the community. maintain judicial independence vALues • Annual seminars held to discuss the current legal The values of the judiciary are fundamental to the daily and judicial environment and to consider future work of the Court. Upon appointment, judges take an oath scenarios and their impact on Court operations of offi ce to do equal justice to all persons, to discharge the duties of offi ce according to the law and to act at all times • Ongoing professional development through to the best of their abilities without fear, favour or affection. participation in Judicial College of Victoria workshops and seminars ouR oBjectives • Universal access to Offi cers resources of Judicial The Court’s four main objectives as stated in the Court’s Offi cers Information Network (JOIN) Three Year Strategic Plan (2008 – 2011) are to: achieve strategic vision for the Court • Maintain a high level of community confi dence in • Accessible and responsive justice through the the Court development and implementation of an ADR pilot • Improve access to justice services program and the development and implementation of the County Koori Court pilot • Ensure timely and effi cient disposal of matters in the Court • Introduce an on site mental health assessment practitioner • Ensure effi cient administration of the Court • Upgrade to video-link facilities in regional courts to We embrace these objectives mindful of our meet current standards, particularly in respect to strategic priorities to: pre-recording evidence of child-witnesses in sexual • Maintain judicial independence offence matters • Achieve strategic vision for the Court m neW InItIAtIVeS c
contents
promote organisational excellence year at a glance 4 through procedural reform • Established a Registry and Associate Report of the Chief Judge 5 Quality Council • Implemented a document protocol and a data Chief executive offi cer’s Report 6 quality framework to ensure availability of high quality data to support business decisions new Initiatives 7 • Conducted website user focus groups and content review in preparation for website upgrade County Court in Victoria 12 • Streamlined the process for development and distribution of Judges’ Practice Notes engaging with the Community 14 • Established a County Court Environment Committee to consider options for reducing paper Criminal Jurisdiction 16 usage, reducing water and energy consumption, and making the Court more environmentally sustainable Civil Jurisdiction 20 • Implemented changes to the Case List Management System (CLMS) to ensure the smooth transition of Supporting Judges of the Court 26 data to the new Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS) Judicial professional Development 30 recognise that our people are important • Reviewed the Court’s induction program and Judges’ Contribution to Judicial Bodies training materials, and continued to promote and professional organisations 32 a learning culture • Implemented an electronic Performance Judges of the County Court 35 Management system • Introduced workforce planning for governance of the Court 36 Court Associates and Registry staff operating Statement and financial Summary 37
the year Ahead 38
2008-09 County CouRt of VICtoRIA AnnuAl RepoRt 3 yeAR At A gLAnce 2008/09 2007/08 % CHANGe totAl CoUNtY CoURt CASeS: Commenced 10,698 10,210 4.8% Finalised 9,952 9,952 0.0% Pending 9,375 9,220 1.7% Overall County Court Clearance Ratio (%) 93% 97.5% totAl CIVIl CASeS: Commenced 6,110 5,388 13.4% Finalised 5,516 5,328 3.5% Pending 6,223 5,856 6.3% Overall Civil Clearance Ratio (%) 90.3% 98.9% totAl CRImINAl CASeS (INClUDING APPeAlS): Commenced 4,588 4,822 -4.9% Finalised 4,436 4,624 -4.1% Pending 3,152 3,364 -6.3% Overall Criminal Clearance Ratio (%) 96.7% 95.9% CRImINAl tRIAlS AND PleAS: Commenced 2,174 2,493 -12.8% Finalised 2,231 2,426 -8.0% Pending 2,039 2,337 -12.8% Trials and Pleas Clearance Ratio (%) 102.6% 97.3% CRImINAl APPeAlS: Commenced 2,414 2,329 3.6% Finalised 2,205 2,198 0.3% Pending 1,113 1,027 8.4% Appeals Clearance Ratio (%) 91.3% 94.4% totAl ADoPtIoN CASeS: Applications Considered 71 94 -24.5% Adoption Orders Made 70 92 -23.9% Applications Pending 6 2 200.0%
Our caseload – Finalised 9,952 civil and criminal cases
Our people – Established the County Koori Court; Koori Court Project Manager recognised for excellence in bringing the Court and Koori Elders together
Our facilities – Technology upgrades completed in Melbourne and Circuit courts; County Court maintains position as Victoria’s state-of-the art courthouse
4 County CouRt of VICtoRIA RepoRt oF the chieF juDge
he County Court has taken on a number of new to over 2,400 in 2008-09. This initiatives as well as responding to a range of is an indicator of the potential tchallenges during the year. future work of the Court in this important area. neW initiAtives Two civil initiatives this year Our new initiatives (see pages 7-11) put us at the have been the fi nancial forefront of the collaborative work done by the higher counselling pilot program and courts on community based justice issues. In particular, the pro bono legal assistance we are proud of the work we have done to establish the pilot scheme. The Court is now Chief Judge County Koori Court. the principal trial court for personal injuries litigation Michael Rozenes The Judges have responded positively to the and has increasing responsibilities in the resolution implementation of additional services with respect to of major commercial disputes. However, almost 75% pre-sentence assessment. A fi rst step in this area has of court hearing time and judicial judgment writing been the establishment of a permanent offi ce within the continues to be devoted to the determination of serious County Court for Community Corrections to conduct injury applications, principally arising from work-place pre-sentence assessments. We have now added to that accidents and involving the Victorian WorkCover with the Sex Offender Clinical Assessment Project and Authority as a party. One of the Court’s critical more recently the Mental Health Assessment pilot. challenges, at present, is to fi nd a way to use appropriate These services are critical to appropriately informing the dispute resolution processes and other administrative judiciary in these areas. (See pages 7 and 8 of this report) procedures to free up scarce judicial resources for other urgent work in both the civil and criminal jurisdictions. cRiminAL juRisDiction ouR juDges We continued to face challenges arising from legislative change with respect to sex cases. It has been diffi cult The Judges of the Court are to be commended for their to respond to the time limitations with respect to diligence in attending to their responsibilities in court special hearings and sex trials whilst maintaining the along with their contributions to the management and commitment to the work of the general list. The impacts administration of the work of the court. It is evident have been felt particularly at the regional courts where in reading this report that our judges actively and the hearing of sex offence cases has often been at the unstintingly contribute as heads of lists, support me in expense of the general list. With sex offence cases more judicial management and committee work as well as often going to trial than those in the general list and undertaking considerable and increasing work loads in the increasing complexity of the law, our resources court, attending professional development programs and have been stretched to the limit. In June, we engaged a contributing to external committees. I commend them consultant to assist us in reviewing the circuit work in for their work. the hope of fi nding ways to improve our processes in During the year we welcomed six new Judges: Christine the next reporting year. Thornton, Mark Taft, Frank Saccardo, Mark Gamble, Howard Mason and Gerard Mullaly. We farewelled fi ve civiL juRisDiction long-serving Judges: Leo Hart, Roland Williams, David The work of the civil jurisdiction has been characterised Morrow, Tom Wodak and John Barnett. by a pro-active approach to expediting matters by It must be said that the resources of the court have extending the administrative mention process in been severely tested during the year. Whilst we accept the Damages and Compensation Lists (except for the intention of the legislation is to improve the justice WorkCover cases). The court is actively engaging in system, it is apparent that the changes bring with them the appropriate dispute resolution initiatives (see pages pressure on our resources which ought to have been 22 and 25), with some interesting outcomes in our pilot taken into account in planning for legislative change. work (see page 10). I am mindful that the implementation in the next The removal of the monetary limit of the Court’s civil reporting year of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 and jurisdiction, from 1 January 2007, has resulted in a the Evidence Act 2008 will, initially at least, produce substantial increase in the number of cases commenced in additional demands on the judges and put pressure on the Commercial List, with a doubling of the cases initiated our listing processes.
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 5 chieF eXecutive oFFiceR’s RepoRt
arly this year the CEO The Court’s partnership with our facility owners TLG of the County Court, and its service partners – G4S, Interform and Honeywell eNeil Twist, took up a – continues to strengthen and be held up as a model for new position as Director of how effective public private partnerships can be. the Appropriate Dispute Resolution (ADR) Unit. I am During the year, I had the opportunity of participating in pleased to have been given the an Australia-wide District Court Administrators’ Business Meeting in Perth for two days. We were reminded that Evi Kadar opportunity of acting in this we have more in common than differences, that we share (acting CEO) position since then and to present my report. many issues and can continually learn from each other. As you read this report you will see that throughout 2008-09 we have been involved in many activities ouR peopLe ARe impoRtAnt aimed at better supporting the Judges of the Court to The Court has excellent staff who are passionate about deliver timely and accessible justice and also to achieve supporting the Judges in their important work. This our key objectives. year we achieved the following in respect to our staff: The Victorian County Court is leading • Acted on Employee Attitude Survey by providing opportunities for all staff to have input into the the way in implementing different Court’s planning processes approaches in responding to the needs • Undertook workforce planning for Judges’ Associates of those coming before the court. • Transferred Library and Information services staff to the County Court from the Supreme Court • Established four new Learning and Development pARtneRships Associate positions to lead and coordinate training Many of our achievements this year have been around and professional development for judicial staff the establishment of community-based partnerships and the implementation of several problem-solving justice Also this year Rosie Smith received a Whole of Justice initiatives. These include the following: award from the Secretary, Penny Armytage. Rosie, who is the Project Manager for the County Koori Court, • Establishment of the County Koori Court at received the award for her ‘outstanding contribution Latrobe Valley. This has involved a partnership with in driving the establishment of the fi rst County Koori Wulgunggo Ngalu which supports Koori offenders Court in Australia’. in the community. The Court has supported horticulture and woodwork projects undertaken by the residents The theme of this year’s awards was ‘Making a Difference’. Rosie clearly demonstrated this by her commitment and • A Memorandum of Understanding was signed between drive in making sure that the Koori community had a the Court, Anglicare Gippsland and Yoowinna strong voice and involvement in the establishment of Wurnalung Healing Service in Lakes Entrance aimed the County Koori Court. This work paves the way for at assisting and supporting victims and families in the Koori community’s ongoing contribution to the County Koori Court matters. This was made possible development and operation of this court. through a Victims Support Agency grant • Implementation of the Sex Offender Clinical Assessment AcKnoWLeDgements pilot in conjunction with Corrections Victoria I would like to thank the Chief Judge Michael Rozenes • A Mental Health Practitioner Assessment pilot and the Judges of the Court for their support throughout was implemented in June in conjunction with the year and their initiative and drive to improve the Court. Justice Health I am very proud of our hardworking staff who demonstrate • Implementation of a three-year judge-led their commitment to good outcomes for the court ADR pilot in civil cases everyday. I thank all court staff for their signifi cant efforts this year which will place us well for the Problem-solving justice initiatives generally sit within year ahead. Finally, I would like to thank the Courts the realm of the summary courts not the intermediate Administration Group, my Management Team and courts. The Victorian County Court is leading the way in Executive Assistant for their support throughout year. implementing different approaches to responding to the needs of those coming before the court.
6 County CouRt of VICtoRIA neW InItIAtIVeS c
neW pRe-SentenCe ClInICAl InItIAtIVeS ASSeSSmentS of SeX offenDeRS Since February 2009, a judge sentencing in a sexual offences case has had available at the Melbourne County Court the option of receiving an assessment of clinical risk for each offender convicted of a sexual offence. The program, in collaboration with Corrections Victoria (Sex Offender Programs), has received funding for the pilot program through the State Government’s Serious Sex Offender Strategy. When requested by a sentencing Judge, the service provides ‘triage’ screening of a person convicted of a sexual offence to identify if they are high-risk offenders. There is the further option for the service to deliver a full clinical assessment of a person identifi ed as at high-risk sexual re-offending. An experienced psychologist, Dr Lauren Gradstein, is available to conduct a same day assessment as to whether an offender is clinically considered a low, moderate-low, moderate-high, or high risk of re-offending. On the basis of this information, the psychologist will determine whether a full clinical assessment is recommended. The full clinical assessment includes information about treatment needs and options for the particular offender, and the anticipated length of time required for the offender to complete treatment. Should the offender be assessed as a high risk of re-offending, the Judge has the option to add to the information available in making the sentencing decision, by requesting a full clinical assessment. This assessment is completed by Dr Gradstein within 7-10 days. An evaluation of the pilot program in Melbourne will commence in July 2009 with steps being taken for the implementation of a similar pilot program in a regional County Court. The results of the evaluation of these pilot programs are expected to inform the decision about extension of the service to County Courts throughout the State.
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 7 mentAl HeAltH pRACtItIoneR SeRVICe At tHe County CouRt
The Mental Health Practitioner Service commenced to offenders who have been arraigned and have entered at the County Court on 1 June, 2009 as a 12-month a guilty plea. The plea hearing is stood down in order for pilot program. The service is a collaborative partnership the assessment to take place. between the Court and the Department of Justice, Justice Health. Importantly, data collected during the pilot program will assist in better understanding the needs of offenders When requested the Mental Health Practitioner with mental health issues and, on going, lead to provides a sentencing Judge with a ‘same day’ improvements in the Mental Health Practitioner service pre-sentence (mental health screening assessment) offered by the Court. report for offender’s who may have mental health issues and needs. During the course of the pilot, the service will be refi ned as needs require. A County Court steering committee, If appropriate, the service identifi es, recommends, chaired by Judge Howard, has been convened to refers and facilitates access to appropriate mental health oversee the operation of the pilot program. services for treatment and support. The service is offered
tHe County KooRI CouRt
The County Court Amendment inappropriate for hearing. Sexual offences and offences (Koori Court) Act 2008 against family violence legislation are specifi cally (the Act) established the excluded from hearing in the Koori Court. County Koori Court Division with the objective of ensuring The Koori Court is also able to hear appeals against sentence greater participation of the by Aboriginal offenders from decisions of the various Aboriginal community in the Magistrates’ Courts located in the Latrobe Valley. sentencing process through the The Koori Court does not have any different role to be played in that process sentencing orders for those offenders who elect to by the Aboriginal elder or appear in the Court. The judge exercises the same respected person and others. sentencing powers that apply in the County Court. The County Koori Court ‘pilot’, As in any criminal case, the Judge is responsible for making the sentencing order. Judge Lawson, operating in the Latrobe Valley, Judge in Charge, will be evaluated over a four-year period. The Act states that the Koori Court may consider any County Koori The Koori Court only has jurisdiction to deal with an oral statement made to it by an Aboriginal elder or Court Division offender who is Aboriginal, pleads guilty and consents to respected person and may inform itself in any way it the matter proceeding in the Koori Court. The Court has thinks fi t. a general discretion to exclude matters that it considers
8 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m NEW INITIATIVES c
The Act does not offer detailed guidance on sentencing Elders and respected persons talk to the offender procedure and the Koori Court has developed a on the importance of obeying the law and the particular process to achieve the purposes of the harm caused to the victim and the community by legislation. Arraignment and sentence occur in the the offending behaviour. They may talk about the Bottom left formal way with the Judge seated alone on the bench. offender’s family and the distress the offending has caused to family and community. The offender is The plea hearing is conducted as a ‘sentencing reminded of his or her value as a member of their From L to R: conversation’ around the oval bar table. A courtroom community and encouraged to change their behaviour Judge Hampel, in the Latrobe Valley Law Courts has a purpose built and work with agencies that offer help in that regard. Judge Grant, table at which all persons involved in the case (including Elders and respected persons frequently offer advice Judge Rizkalla, the judge) are seated. The judge sits with two elders based on their life experience. The elders /respected Chief Judge Rozenes, or respected persons. In addition, present at the oval persons give the court its unique authority and flavour. Judge Lawson, table during a hearing are the Koori Court Officer, the Defendants will nearly always engage in discussion Judge Smallwood. prosecutor, a corrections worker, the lawyer for the with elders/respected persons and accord respect to accused, the accused and family members. If there is a the process. This engagement is an important step in particular worker (ie. drug and alcohol worker or mental encouraging offenders to change their behaviour. Chief Judge health worker) involved with the accused, that worker Rozenes addresses may also sit at the bar table. Other family members and The open exchange of information that occurs within the guests at the community members may be present in the courtroom. Koori court gives the judicial officer a better understanding launching of the of the defendant’s circumstances, the context of the County Koori Court, The open exchange of offending and the prospects for rehabilitation. The Latrobe Valley Law sentencing decision is a fully informed one. information that occurs within Courts. The County Koori Court commenced sitting at the the Koori court gives the judicial Latrobe Valley in February 2009. Bottom RIGHT officer a better understanding of the defendant’s circumstances, the Uncle Albert Mullett and dancers on the context of the offending and the way to the court prospects for rehabilitation. room to conduct the smoking ceremony.
Each case commences with an acknowledgement of country. The judicial officer explains the process to Judge Lawson the accused including the role of elders and respected convenes a session persons. It is made clear that the elders/respected at the County Koori persons are not responsible in any way for the sentencing Court workshop. decision – that is the responsibility of the judge. As in any other criminal proceeding, any prior history is Judge Parsons presented and the prosecutor provides a summary of the The Koori Court logo was created by Mildura based artist explains criminal offending. The defence lawyer outlines the defendant’s Lance Atkinson, a Gamilraay man. situation. It is then common for the offender to be asked court procedure at to speak about themselves or the offending or both. the County Koori Family members speak about (or to) the offender as Court training. do community members, the Koori Court Officer and representatives from support agencies.
2008-09 Annual Report 9 AlteRnAtIVe DISpute ReSolutIon (ADR) At tHe County CouRt
BAcKgRounD ADR pRocesses in 2008-2009 In early 2007, major changes In June 2008, the Victorian Government announced were introduced to the processes the allocation of $18 million for ADR programs aimed at adopted in the Court’s civil improving access to justice for all Victorians by making jurisdiction. The objective of legal processes for disputes quicker, simpler, cheaper Judge Misso, these changes was to achieve and more effective. The package included funding for Judge in Charge, low cost, expeditious resolution of cases consistent with a Higher Courts ADR Pilot – a two year initiative to Family Property the demands of justice. implement judge-led mediation in the Supreme and Division and County Courts. An additional judge was appointed to ADR Judge The changes involved timetabling of cases to trial the Court to assist with the implementation of ADR as quickly as possible, minimising the number of initiatives. An ADR coordinator, Sabrina Colella, was appearances in Court prior to trial, encouraging the appointed in December 2008 as part of the Pilot and an parties to cooperate in the exchange of information ADR Committee was established within the Court to prior to hearing and discouraging disputes concerning coordinate the Court’s ADR strategy. discovery and interrogatories. Standard orders timetabling matters for trial in most civil and commercial The ADR Committee resolved to trial ADR processes trials also included orders for mediation (by private in 100 cases across a broad range of civil proceedings, mediators) to be conducted prior to trial. including general commercial cases, family property cases, and 40 workers’ serious injury applications. The Court will continue to After consultation with the relevant stakeholders in serious injury applications, protocols were developed implement case management for ‘judicial settlement conferences’ which were and other ADR strategies aimed conducted intensively over three weeks in May 2009 by fi ve specialist judges. There was a settlement rate of at maximising early resolution 37% in the serious injury settlement conference pilot. of disputes, and the effi cient In general commercial cases, the settlement rate of case conferences was 22%. In family property cases, the disposition of cases to hearing. settlement rate of case conferences was 43%. The Court received feedback from the participants in the One important feature of those changes was the serious injury settlement conference pilot that the critical introduction of judge-led ADR in the form of case feature was not the participation of judges but rather the conferences, which were conducted by judges in presence of senior WorkCover offi cers with authority to commercial cases, testator family maintenance claims settle the cases. and de facto property disputes. The conferences last an hour or two, or up to a full day, depending on the type The Court continued to encourage stakeholders in of case. The conferences involve discussions between serious injury applications to hold (private) settlement the judge and the lawyers (and their clients) in open conferences prior to hearing. The WorkCover Authority court about the issues raised of fact and law. Settlements responded to this encouragement by conducting, were reached in over 60% of cases. Even when through its panel fi rms, a number of ‘bulk’ settlement settlement is not achieved, the case conference helps conferences with plaintiff fi rms in May and June defi ne the disputed issues and the court is well placed to 2009. Again, the key factor in the high settlement rate give directions to ensure speedy resolution. achieved was reported to be the presence of senior WorkCover offi cers with authority to settle the cases. The Second Exposure Draft of the Victorian Law Reform Commission Civil Justice Inquiry dated During 2008-09, the civil case management measures 6 September 2007 commented favourably on the introduced in 2007 continued to work effectively. The use of the case conference procedure by the Court. requirement for mediation (to date conducted privately by the parties) in commercial and damages cases
10 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m neW InItIAtIVeS c
continues to result in settlement of most cases prior to trial. From 1 January to 30 June 2009, about 1,533 damages cases and 933 commercial cases were fi nalised at Melbourne. Only 2% of cases proceeded to trial. The large majority of cases settled prior to trial. In addition, judges of the Court continued to hold case conferences in commercial, banking and fi nance, and testator and family maintenance cases. Testator family maintenance claims and property disputes between former domestic partners share an important characteristic: they relate to the distribution of a fi xed pool of assets. That asset pool can very quickly be consumed by the legal fees expended in the litigation itself. It is considered that use of special case management techniques as well as ADR mechanisms may assist in limiting the expense of the litigation to the parties as well as maximising the prospect of the early resolution of these cases. There are currently approximately 220 active cases of these kinds in the County Court. Banks and fi nance companies are initiating more claims for possession in the County Court. As described in the ‘Developments in Commercial Law’ section, the Court has introduced a specialist banking and fi nance division which is already constituted by almost 400 active matters. The Court has also been able to refer appropriate cases from this division for fi nancial counselling pursuant to its fi nancial counselling pilot introduced on 1 September, 2008.
LooKing AheAD Currently, the Court is limited to using its judges to undertake all these ADR roles. In order to properly expand the use of ADR techniques, while ensuring that judges remain available to hear cases in the Court’s civil jurisdiction, it may be necessary to consider appointing judicial registrars or a pool or panel of external ADR experts (including, for example, mediators, barristers and retired judges). In the next fi nancial year, the Court will continue to implement case management and other ADR strategies aimed at maximising early resolution of disputes, and the effi cient disposition of cases to hearing.
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 11 udges of the County Court, together with Court staff, are committed to delivering fair and accessible justice to all JVictorians. As the busiest trial court in Victoria with over 10,000 cases commenced this year, the Chief Judge, listing Judges and Registry Listing Managers work together to ensure the Court’s trial schedule optimises the use of the Court’s facilities and the County availability of judges to hear matters brought before the Court. In addition to the principal court house located in Melbourne’s CouRt In central business district, Judges of the Court hear cases at thirteen Circuit courts situated in the major regional centres in Victoria. Crime circuit sittings are managed by four judges who are assigned VICtoRIA as follows: • gippsland region managed by judge Rizkalla Bairnsdale, Morwell (Latrobe Valley), Sale • northeast victoria managed by judge morrish Bendigo, Shepparton, Wangaratta, Wodonga • northwest victoria managed by judge mp Bourke Mildura • southwest victoria managed by judge parsons A busy circuit court Ballarat, Geelong, Hamilton, Horsham, Warrnambool case load is indicative The operation of the County Koori Court at the Latrobe Valley of Judges’ continuing is managed by Judge Lawson. Trial statistics for the Circuit Courts for the 2008-09 year are commitment to represented in fi gures 1 and 2. providing accessible For 2008-09 year, there was an increase in matters initiated and a decrease in matters fi nalised in comparison with the previous year. justice to Victorians In 2008-09, Ballarat, Geelong, Latrobe Valley and Bendigo were the living in regional areas. busiest Circuit courts. Throughout the year, on average eight judges were allocated to hear criminal matters and two judges were allocated to hear civil matters at circuit courts. In addition, two judges sat at VCAT, one Judge was allocated to the Coroner’s Court and one Judge sat at the Children’s Court.
ciRcuit couRt RevieW In June 2009, the County Court commenced a review of its Circuit Court procedures and protocols aimed at maximising the effi ciency and effectiveness of circuit activity. The Court commissioned Boston Consulting Group (BCG) to conduct a survey of circuit operations amongst Judges and Registrars. Results of the survey were discussed at a workshop held on 29 June. The session focussed on aspects of circuit court operations that were identifi ed by survey participants as areas for improvement. It was agreed that a number of initiatives could be pursued including: • the co-ordination of listing and sittings between regional courts to reduce backlogs • adoption of a systematic approach to intensives • standardisation of practices across the circuit court system Planning and implementation of the agreed effi ciency initiatives will commence in 2009-10 fi nancial year.
12 County CouRt of VICtoRIA OVERVIEW OF CIRCUIT CASE ACTIVITY BY LOCATION
350
300
250
200
150 m County CouRt In 100 VICtoRIA
50
0 NORTHWEST Bairnsdale Ballarat Bendigo Geelong Hamilton Horsham Latrobe Mildura Sale Shepparton Wangaratta Warrnambool Wondonga Valley
Mildura InitiatedNORTH CENTRALFinalised Pending
Shepparton Wodonga Wangaratta Horsham Bendigo
Ballarat MELBOURNE CIRCUIT COURT ACTIVITY Hamilton Bairnsdale 2007-08 and 2008-09 Sale Geelong Warrnambool Morwell 1900
1850
1800
1750 GIPPSLAND
1700 SOUTHWEST
1650
1600 Map of Victoria showing the location of County Court circuit courts. 1550 2007-08 2008-09
Initiated Finalised Pending
Figure 1
OVERVIEW OF CIRCUIT CASE ACTIVITY BY LOCATION
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0 Bairnsdale Ballarat Bendigo Geelong Hamilton Horsham Latrobe Mildura Sale Shepparton Wangaratta Warrnambool Wondonga Valley
Figure 2 Initiated Finalised Pending
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 13
CIRCUIT COURT ACTIVITY 2007-08 and 2008-09 1900
1850
1800
1750
1700
1650
1600
1550 2007-08 2008-09
Initiated Finalised Pending udges and Court staff welcomed over fi ve thousand visitors to the Melbourne County Court facility in 2008-09. Over four Jthousand students from schools throughout Victoria participated in the County Court student information program. The program, managed by Senior Tipstaff Roger Carlisle, provides students with an opportunity to observe court proceedings and to learn about the role engAgIng of the Judge, the jury and counsel in a court setting. Visits to the Court enhance classroom-based learning and are designed to complement the WItH tHe VCE Legal Studies curriculum. The Court observation program is also a regular event at the Circuit Courts where students from universities and schools in the local and CommunIty surrounding areas visit the Court during the Circuit sitting. Local community groups also participate in the program. Judges also make time to travel to local schools to speak to students about the role of the judge in the court room and court procedure. At the circuit towns of Sale and Horsham, Judge Murphy addressed VCE classes as an opportunity to explain current cases and to educate students on their civic responsibilities and sentencing principles.
speAKing pARts FoRum The Court welcomes In October 2008 the County Court was the venue for the Trust for Young Australians - Speaking Parts forum. Over one hundred Year 12 community engagement students from schools across Victoria assembled in the Ceremonial Court to participate in the inaugural event. Students also had an opportunity through its education to meet with County Court Judges during an informal lunch. programs hosting visitors The County Court was the venue for the fi rst from near and far. sittings of the Victorian Bushfi res Royal Commission during April and May. Judges, staff and County Court facility partners accommodated the needs of the Commissioners, counsel, parties, public and media.
‘Speaking Parts’ is an initiative of committed leaders in the legal profession. The aims of ‘Speaking Parts’ include: to illustrate the role advocacy plays in the legal profession; to inspire female students to consider advocacy as a career option; to demonstrate the advocacy roles woman play in the legal profession; to promote diversity in the legal profession; to challenge any gendered stereotyping of advocates by students; and to create an educational resource for schools. Chief Judge Rozenes welcomed guest speakers and students at the event which was sponsored by Judge Millane.
county couRt inteRn pRogRAm Other student visitors included post-graduate law students from Canada on an exchange program organised by Monash University. For the fi rst time this year, the Court hosted two interns from Valparaiso University, Indiana, USA. The interns worked with Judge Parsons and his Associate, undertaking research in relation to particular aspects of cases before the Judge.
14 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m m engAgIngneW InItIAtIVeS WItH tHe c CommunIty
Judge Murphy County Court in Melbourne and in the regional locations visitoRs to the couRt addresses for the annual Courts Open Day. Court Judicial and Administrative staff as well as Horsham College professional delegations from Japan, New Zealand, Held in May, the Court offered a varied program year 11 Legal Papua New Guinea, People’s Republic of China, including an information session on the new County Studies students Tanzania (sponsored by the World Bank) and the United Koori Court division. Judge Misso provided an overview while on Circuit in Kingdom also visited the County Court during the year. of ADR and Judge Anderson led a sentencing exercise Horsham. The building design of the County Court and advanced (a role play where students took turns to participate). technology used in the County Court was the focus of a Associates and Tipstaves convened a County Court visit by delegates from interstate, New Zealand and the ‘Q & A’ session which focussed on court procedure, Judge Millane UK. The tour was led by former County Court Judge, and the role of the Associate and Tipstaff in Court. with students at Judge Strong and the architect responsible for the The County Court extends its thanks to Court Network the Speaking Parts design of the County Court facility. volunteers for their support. forum. The principal court room was pRoFessionAL DeveLopment FoR modifi ed in accordance with the cuRRent AnD FutuRe pRActitioneRs Court Network The Judges also continued to play an important volunteers at the requirement for the proceedings role in communicating with the legal profession, law County Court to be accessible to communities students and the community more generally in a information desk range of activities including conducting continuing provide assistance affected by the fi res as well as the legal education seminars, moot courts and community to court users. general public and media. information sessions. In addition to the main court couRt netWoRK AnD the BLue Judge Anderson room, court rooms were allocated jAcKet pRogRAm leads members of the public in In January 2009, Court Network introduced a Blue to the Commission as public a sentencing Jacket program into the Melbourne County Court. exercise during observation rooms. The Blue Jacket program is a free information service the Court’s open available to all visitors to the Court and is most valuable day. to members of the public who are attending court Members of the Adult Parole Board met with the hearings. Members of the Blue Jacket program liaise Chief Judge, CEO, Learning & Development (LDA) with Court Network volunteers stationed at the Court Counsel, Associates, Registry and senior managers during a visit and who provide assistance and support to witnesses to the Court in June. Registry processes and access to and family members. The Blue Jacket desk is located practitioners and Court information were the focus of discussions during on the ground fl oor adjacent to the main corridor and public await the the one-day visit. Court Network offi ce. The Court is pleased to offer this start of fi rst day service and thanks Court Network volunteers for their of the Victorian LAW WeeK ‘open DAy’ contribution in supporting community members on their Bushfi res Royal Finally, over three hundred members of the public, journey through the Court. Commission including tertiary and secondary students, visited the hearing in the Ceremonial Court.
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 15 oveRvieW In continuing efforts to reduce criminal trial delay, pre-trial hearing lists for general crime reduced from two lists to one. Pre-trial hearings are conducted monthly by Chief Judge Rozenes, and Judges Hannan and Cotterell on a rotational basis. This has provided an additional judicial resource to hear criminal trials. From 1 July 2008, cases involving child and cognitively impaired witnesses have required the conduct of a special hearing. This CRImInAl involves the pre-recording of the complainant’s evidence and must be done within three months of committal. JuRISDICtIon Criminal Listings has continued to monitor the impact of this legislative change to ensure that these cases are effectively managed whilst ensuring general crime matters are also listed within acceptable time frames. The County Court is the largest and busiest trial court in Victoria. It has jurisdiction to hear all indictable offences, other than treason and murder. The Court also hears appeals from the Magistrates’ Court.
In June 2009, Chris Stergiou, the Sexual Offences List Coordinator, and Claire Eldridge, the Sexual Offences List Administrative Coordinator became responsible for the timetabling of cases involving child or cognitively impaired witnesses. Prior to the fi rst directions hearing, a date is allocated for the pre-trial hearing, the pre-recording of evidence and jury empanelment. Once these dates have been established, the matter is allocated to a Judge and a fi nal directions hearing date is set. In April 2009, the position of the Crimes, Evidence and Bail Acts (CEBA) Project Offi cer was established to manage various parts of the preparatory work required for the implementation of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 and the Evidence Act 2008.
ALLocAtion oF juDges In 2007-08, on average, statewide, 45 judges heard matters in the criminal jurisdiction, 37 in Melbourne and eight at circuit courts. Throughout the year, 35 Judges heard trials involving sexual offences.
16 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m CRImInAl JuRISDICtIon c
oveRALL peRFoRmAnce diSpOSaLS By metHOd Of Cases commenced fell by 4.9%, totalling 4,588 (4,822 in finaLiSatiOn 2007-08) comprising: CRImINAl JURISDICtIoN fY 2008-09 • 2,174 trials and pleas (2,493 in 2007-08) melbourne • 2,414 appeals from the Magistrates’ Court Plea of Guilty 1,023 57.6% (2,329 in 2007-08) Trial turned plea of guilty 232 13.1% There was a fall in the number of cases fi nalised (4.1%), Trial Conviction 201 11.3% totalling 4,436 (4,624 in 2007-08). Trial Acquittal 216 12.2% • 2,231 trials and pleas (2,426 in 2007-08) Prosecution withdrawn 91 5.1% • 2,205 appeals (2,198 in 2007-08) Other 12 0.7% Total 1,775 100.0% Overall, cases pending fell by 6.3%, totalling 3,152 (3,364 in 2007-08). circuit • 2,039 trials and pleas (2,337 in 2007-08) Plea of Guilty 277 60.7% Trial turned plea of guilty 65 14.3% • 1,113 appeals (1,027 in 2007-08) Trial Conviction 36 7.9% The overall criminal clearance ratio for the reporting Trial Acquittal 60 13.2% period increased to 96.7% compared with 95.9% for the Prosecution withdrawn 17 3.7% previous year. For trials and pleas the clearance rate was Other 1 0.2% 102.6%, and for appeals, the corresponding fi gure was 91.3% (94.4% for the year prior). Total 456 100.0% statewide Plea of Guilty 1,300 58.3% Trial turned plea of guilty 297 13.3% Trial Conviction 237 10.6% Trial Acquittal 276 12.4% Prosecution withdrawn 108 4.8% Other 13 0.6% Grand Total 2,231 100.0%
CRIMINAL TRIALS, PLEAS AND APPEALS 6000
5000
4000
Cases 3000
2000
1000
0 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Commenced Finalised Pending
NUMBER OF SEXUAL OFFENCE CASES 2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 17 INITIATED 2001-02 TO 2008-09 47% 600
500
400
Cases 300
200
100
0 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Sexual Offence Cases initiated
SEXUAL OFFENCE CASES AS A PERCENTAGE OF ALL CRIMINAL CASES 3000 30
2500 25
2000 20
Cases 1500 15
1000 10
500 5
0 0 % 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Total Criminal Cases Initiated % Sexual Offence Cases mAnAgement AnD opeRAtIon of tHe CRImInAl JuRISDICtIon
the 2008-09 year has been a being run as a pilot program for 12 months as busy one for judges working a collaborative partnership with Justice Health, in the criminal jurisdiction. Department of Justice. Various information sessions Apart from the core work of were conducted within the Court, as well as to the conducting criminal trials, Bar and the Law Institute of Victoria. A Steering Judge Howard pleas, appeals and other Committee is chaired by Judge Howard. hearings, there have been many other involvements. • The Court continued to host and facilitate the The introduction of the Human Rights Charter, the Criminal Users Group, which is comprised of Criminal Procedure Act 2009 and the Evidence Act stakeholders practising in the criminal jurisdiction 2008 will present a radical new landscape for criminal on both the prosecution and defence sides as well practice. The Judges enthusiastically embrace these as a representative from the Magistrates’ Court. new challenges. The Group provides a forum to review current developments in the criminal law and procedure and Judges Punshon and Howard, with the Chief Judge, have enables participants to discuss matters of common portfolio responsibility for the criminal jurisdiction which interest and concern. is exercised through the weekly Judicial Management Committee and the Court’s Executive Committee. They • Of signifi cance, a sub-committee of the Criminal are assisted by the Judges in Crime Group, chaired by Users Group recently presented a paper to the Judge Lacava, which meets on a fortnightly basis to Court proposing the establishment of an Alternative discuss criminal issues affecting the Court. Dispute Resolution scheme in the criminal jurisdiction. This would be a fi rst for Victoria. The Some of the important initiatives and developments for proposal is an exciting and challenging one which the year were: would involve sitting or retired criminal trial Judges facilitating the resolution of criminal trials, or at • The participation of Judges in continuing workshops least, their signifi cant reduction. The project is conducted by the Judicial College of Victoria designed to signifi cantly address trial delay and to (JCV), and the Court, concerning the Human Rights resolve criminal cases on a timely basis, for both Charter, the Criminal Procedure Act, the Evidence Act the victim and the offender. It is proposed that and other relevant practice areas. there be a pilot program for 12-18 months with • Membership of Judges Howard and Taft on the appropriate evaluation. The proposal is presently JCV’s inter-court Criminal Procedure Manual being considered by the Court. Committee, which drafted and published a criminal • Judges Sexton and Howard continued their procedure manual in anticipation of the introduction membership of the inter-court Child and Cognitively of the Criminal Procedure Act in 2010. Judge Impaired Witness Committee, convened by the Taft was also involved in the drafting of criminal JCV. The committee reviews current practices and procedure rules. This work continues. examines new research in relation to the experience • Judges Rizkalla, Douglas, Sexton and Pullen of children in court, particularly in sex cases. It also remained members of the inter-court Criminal considers the position of the cognitively-impaired Charge Book Committee which superintends the witness. The annual workshop, which was held in on-going publication of the JCV’s Criminal Charge November last year, provided Judges with a forum Book - an essential tool for trial Judges. within which to consider these matters, particularly as to communicating with and examining a child • The involvement of a large number of Judges in witness in Court. responding to and commenting upon the Law Reform Commission’s ground-breaking Jury • Judges continued to provide responses to a myriad Directions Final Report of May 2009. of law reform proposals; they liaised with visiting overseas and interstate Judges; they mentored • The introduction, on 1 June 2009, of the Mental school and university students and contributed to Health Practitioner Service, which provides a pre- the work of academics at the various law schools. sentence report to Judges for offenders who may have mental health issues and needs. The service • Finally, a signifi cant contribution was made by the is conducted by Julian Jamieson, a registered Judges to external organizations concerned with psychiatric nurse, who can provide advice on criminal law matters such as the Adult Parole Board, appropriate referral and treatment options. It is the Youth Parole Board and the Forensic Leave Panel.
18 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m CRImInAl JuRISDICtIon
SeX offenCeS lISt
the sex offences List continues to dominate the or a cognitively impaired court’s criminal jurisdiction and there is little to suggest complainant) of sexual offences that this situation will change in the coming year as cases and all other non-sexual indicated by the fi gures below. offence criminal cases are facing CRIMINAL TRIALS, PLEAS AND APPEALS longer periods before fi nalisation. In 2008-09, the number of sexual offence cases fi led At least partly due to this delay 6000 Judge Sexton, with the Court increased for the sixth consecutive year. before trials are heard, the proportion of sex offences Judge in Charge, 5000 Since 2002-03, the number of initiations has increased cases resulting in pleas of guilty, such that a trial does Sex Offences List by 64% to 529 cases. Despite the increasing caseload, not need to be held, has decreased to 4000 the number of cases fi nalised was also higher for the an eight year low, and the number of trials that fourth consecutive year, and in 2008-09, 548 cases proceeded to verdict has more than doubled between Cases 3000 were fi nalised. For only the second time in the past eight 2001-02 and 2008-09. years, a clearance rate of over 100% has been achieved 2000 for sexual offence cases, which is usually an indication There is an expectation that the workload will also that the court is keeping up with the workload. increase substantially in the next year due to changes to 1000 the legislation relating to Extended Supervision Orders. Since 2005, the court has been absorbing this new area 0 47% of criminal trials that proceed 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 of2007-08 work with2008-09 numbers of applications far beyond what to verdict involve sexual offencesCommenced wasFinalised projected.Pending The court has absorbed this huge increase in overall The appearance that the court is handling the increasing workload with no additional resources, beyond NUMBERcaseload OF arises SEXUAL in part OFFENCE from the CASES court complying with provisionCRIMINAL for TRIALS,a Judge toPLEAS be in ANDcharge APPEALS of the Sex Offences INITIATEDthe legislative 2001-02 timeframes TO 2008-09 in cases involving a child or 6000List. It may be that the capacity to absorb further 47% 600 cognitively impaired complainant. However, behind increases has been reached. the court’s ability to achieve these fi gures lie the issues 5000 500 the court has in other areas, as highlighted in last year’s annual report. 4000 400
Sexual offences cases now constitute approximately Cases 3000
Cases 300 24% of all criminal cases initiated and 25% of all criminal fi nalisations. Almost half of sexual offences cases involve 2000 200 a child or cognitively impaired complainant. Completing these cases within three months of committal means 1000 100 that the other half (ie. those not involving children 0 0 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Commenced Finalised Pending Sexual Offence Cases initiated
SEXUAL OFFENCE CASES AS A NUMBER OF SEXUAL OFFENCE CASES PERCENTAGE OF ALL CRIMINAL CASES INITIATED 2001-02 TO 2008-09 47% 3000 30 600
2500 25 500
2000 20 400 Cases 1500 15 Cases 300
1000 10 200
500 5 100
0 0 % 0 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Total Criminal Cases Initiated % Sexual Offence Cases Sexual Offence Cases initiated
SEXUAL OFFENCE CASES AS A PERCENTAGE OF ALL CRIMINAL CASES 3000 30
2500 2008-09 AnnuAl25 RepoRt 19
2000 20
Cases 1500 15
1000 10
500 5
0 0 % 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Total Criminal Cases Initiated % Sexual Offence Cases oveRvieW he 2008-09 fi nancial year has seen 6,110 cases initiated within the Civil Jurisdiction compared with 5,388 cases for the tprevious fi nancial year, an increase of 13.4%. This year changes were made to the Commercial List with the introduction of a number of new and expanded Divisions. The new Divisions established were General, Expedited Commercial Cases, Building Cases, Family Property, and Banking and Finance. Initiations for the Commercial List increased considerably by 30% with 2,285 cases in 2008-09 compared with 1,753 cases in 2007-08, whilst the Damages and Compensation List had a slight increase in initiations, 1.8 %, with 3,592 cases in 2008-09 compared with 3,528 cases initiated in 2007-08. The main factor infl uencing the increase in initiations is the Serious Injury Division rising 6% from 1,623 cases in 2007-08 to 1,713 cases in 2008-09. CIVIl The Damages and Compensation List constituted 61.1% of all civil cases initiated through the County Court during the 2008-09 fi nancial year with the Commercial List comprising of 38.9%. This represents a JuRISDICtIon 5.7% increase on last year. The number of cases fi nalised within the Commercial List rose by 7.7% with 1,814 cases fi nalised in 2008-09 compared with 1,684 cases in 2007-08. The Damages and Compensation List has remained consistent with the number of cases fi nalised totalling 3,702 cases in 2008-09 compared with 3,770 in 2007-08, a slight decrease of 1.8%. The 2008-09 fi nancial year has seen a number of County Court strategic priorities implemented within the civil jurisdiction including the expansion of the Administrative Mention System and formalising 6,110 cases initiated Alternative (or Appropriate) Dispute Resolution.
within the Civil ALLocAtion oF juDges Jurisdiction… In 2008-09, for the County Court state-wide, on average 21 judges were allocated to hear matters in the civil jurisdiction. Fifteen judges an increase of 13.4% were allocated to hear general matters, one judge heard matters in the Damages List, one judge heard WorkCover/Serious Injury applications, one judge heard commercial matters, one judge heard practice court matters and two judges were allocated to VCAT.
ADministRAtive mention system In 2008-09, the Administrative Mention system was introduced in other Divisions within the Damages and Compensation, and Commercial Lists. Administrative Mentions are now conducted within the Serious Injury; General; Application; and Medical and Defamation Divisions of the Damages and Compensation List; and the General; Building; Banking and Finance; Family Property; and Expedited Divisions within the Commercial List. The benefi t of this initiative for Litigants is a reduction in costs and improved case fl ow management through the Court.
FutuRe Focus Looking ahead into the next fi nancial year the Civil Jurisdiction will focus on a number of key strategic priorities including: • Facilitation of ongoing Alternative (or Appropriate) Dispute Resolution, Settlement Conferences and Case Conferences. • Review and implementation of the fi ndings of the Victorian Law Reform Commission’s (VLRC) Civil Justice Review.
20 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m CIVIl JuRISDICtIon c CiViL CaSeS Twenty-three Judges presided over 71 adoption disposals by method of fi nalisation applications state-wide. For 2008-09, 70 adoption orders were made with six pending as at 30 June, 2009. ADoptions cAse tRAnsFeRs All Cases fY 2008-09 The Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991 empowers courts Consent Order Rule 59.06 1,111 to transfer cases to a more appropriate jurisdiction. Judge Holt is the designated judicial offi cer. Dismissed 1,190 For the year ended 30 June, 2009, case transfers to the Interstate Judgement Registration 10 County Court totalled 96 including one case transferred Judgement by Court 992 from the High Court, 19 cases from the Supreme Court and 76 cases from the Magistrates’ Court. Conversely, Judgement Default Appearance 343 22 cases were transferred to the Supreme Court and six cases to the Magistrates’ Court. Judgement Default Defence 64 Judgement Recover Possession Land 26 oveRALL peRFoRmAnce Cases commenced rose by 13.4%, totalling 6,110 (5,388 Notice of Discontinuance 493 in 2007-08), cases fi nalised rose by 3.5% totalling 5,516 Notice of Dismissal Sent 480 (5,328 in 2007-08) and cases pending rose by 6.3% totalling 6,223 (5,856 in 2007-08). The overall clearance Settled after Mediation 1 ratio for civil matters was 90.3%. Settled at Mediation 400 There were 1,085 Practice Court applications for Stay of Proceedings 11 the period 2008-09 representing an increase of approximately 20% over previous year. Struck out by Court 254
Struck out by Registrar 114 Transfer to Magistrates’ Court Part 3 5 Transfer to Magistrates’ Court Part 5 1 Transfer to Magistrates’ Court Part 6 1 Transfer to Supreme Court Part 3 19 Transfer to Supreme Court Part 5 1 Total 5,516
TOTAL CIVIL CASES
12
10
8
6
4
2
000’s 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09
Commenced Finalised Pending
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 21 Damages List
Proceedings in this List Thursday, at which time trial dates and timetabling constituted the majority of civil orders are obtained. initiations in the County Court in the year 2008-09. The number Reserve List of cases initiated in the Damages Judge Davis managed the combined civil reserve list List was 3,592 in the financial from July to September 2008. From October 2008, its year, compared with 3,528 in Judge Davis, management has been alternated through a number the preceding financial year. Judge in Charge, civil judges. The reserve list has continued to operate The number of initiations in the Serious Injury Division Damages List very efficiently, with the number of ‘not reached’ cases for the financial year was 1,713 compared with 1,623 remaining low on average. During the first three months General Division, in the previous financial year. Damages List of 2009, all matters in the reserve list were allocated (Serious Injury Of the total judgments written across the civil to a Judge for hearing. There were a number of ‘not Division) and jurisdiction of the Court, approximately 70% were in reached’ cases between April and June 2009, all of Defamation respect of Serious Injury Applications under s134AB of which were re-fixed for hearing with priority or as a Division the Accident Compensation Act 1985. special fixture before a particular Judge, generally within three months of the original trial date. Judge Davis continued to manage the List in 2008-09, as well as the General, Serious Injury and Defamation Alternative (or Appropriate) Divisions of the List. In addition, she continued to Dispute Resolution oversee the daily operation of the civil reserve list. Parties in damages cases are required by the Court to Judge Davis participated in the Civil Procedure mediate their dispute prior to trial. Advisory Group chaired by the Chief Justice. Judge Davis and Judge Anderson continued to Approximately 70% of judgments manage the Court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) strategy in the civil jurisdiction and to participate in the civil jurisdiction related in the Court’s ADR Committee, which was set up in to matters under s134AB of the December 2008. Accident Compensation Act 1985. Following the successful implementation in 2007-08 of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) strategies in serious injury applications brought under s.93 of the Following the retirement of Judge Wodak in early Transport Accident Act 1986, Judge Davis initiated 2009, Judge Lawson was appointed Judge-in-Charge a pilot program of judge-led ADR interventions in of the Medical Division. From July 2009, Judge applications made under s134AB of the Accident Saccardo will take over the management of the Medical Compensation Act 1985. Division. Medical cases are now listed for trial using the Administrative Mention system, eliminating the In consultation with Plaintiff law firms and the Victorian need for a directions hearing where the parties are Workcover Authority (together with its defendant able to consent to suitable timetabling orders and panel firms) forty cases were selected as appropriate giving the parties greater control over the process. for settlement conferences, which were conducted A new Medical Division Practice Note was published by judges at the Court between 19 May and 2 June in April 2009 to provide practitioners with information 2009. Approximately 40% of the cases resolved at the about the Administrative Mention system and settlement conferences. At the conclusion of the pilot, procedures. The management of this change in Judge Davis met with pilot participants to obtain their procedure was highly successful, with practitioners views about the process. swiftly adapting to the new system. The Court continued, through its Serious Injury User Judge Holt continued to manage the Applications Group, to encourage the parties in s.134AB applications Division of the List in the Practice Court. to conduct settlement conferences prior to hearing. In response to that encouragement, the VWA conducted All divisions of the Damages and Compensation List are a number of ‘bulk’ settlement conferences in May and now managed using the Administrative Mention system, June 2009 with a reported 70% settlement rate. save for the WorkCover Division which deals with Statutory Benefits cases. During 2009, further discussions will be held with members of the Serious Injury User Group as to The WorkCover Division was managed by Judge further ADR strategies which might be adopted in Bowman until November 2008 when Judge Wischusen relation to s.134AB cases. Consideration will also be commenced as Judge-in-Charge of that division. given to implementing further ADR strategies in other Matters in that division are listed for mention on a damages cases.
22 County Court of VictoriA m CIVIL JURISDICTION c
Commercial List
During 2008-09, the County Court’s commercial The Court has continued to work has continued to grow. This is consistent with an utilise innovative forms of ongoing trend since the initiation of the Commercial List dispute resolution, including Pilot by Judge Anderson on 1 July 2006, and the lifting the case management of the monetary limit for proceedings in the County conference, a financial Court from 1 January 2007. counselling pilot and a pro bono legal assistance scheme. In the year ended 30 June, 2007, there were 1,171 Judge Kennedy, initiations in commercial matters in the Melbourne Case conferences first trialled by the commercial Judge in charge, Registry. This amount has now almost doubled with judges in 2007, continue to be used at an early stage Banking and 2,200 commercial matters issued in the Court for the in a proceeding as well as for ‘old’ cases which may Finance Division, year ended 30 June, 2009. be targeted for aggressive case management. In the Commercial List Commercial List a case conference is generally held in The County Court remains open court, and after a discussion of the issues between Counsel and the judge, the parties are usually invited to committed to the provision of retire for private discussion. expeditious methods of resolving Financial Counselling commercial disputes by judges with On 1 September, 2008, the Court introduced a financial experience in commercial litigation. counselling pilot program in partnership with Kildonan Uniting Care. This enabled the Court to refer appropriate cases for financial counselling, particularly in the banking Commercial matters now constitute approximately forty and finance division. per cent of civil initiations for the year to 30 June, 2009. The objectives of the Commercial List are flexibility, Pro Bono speed, cost savings, and a fair and authoritative The commercial judges also introduced a Commercial determination of the dispute. A substantial proportion List pro bono legal assistance scheme pilot that provided of the Court’s commercial work continues to be for judges of the Court to refer unrepresented litigants in listed for trial within six months of issue. This includes appropriate cases to a pro bono panel for the provision commercial cases of considerable complexity. Cases are of legal assistance. The pro bono panel is managed with also regularly commenced wherein relief is sought well the assistance of the duty barristers’ scheme of the beyond the previous monetary limit of $200,000. Victorian Bar. The Court continues to have two judges working full- The commercial judges continue to engage in constant time hearing and managing commercial cases: Judge review of case management procedures to explore Anderson and Judge Kennedy. However, with the appropriate methods of dispute resolution. During expansion of commercial work generally, the Court the financial year, Judge Anderson participated in the was able to introduce a number of new and expanded Civil Procedure Advisory Group, a group established specialist divisions of the Commercial List from June by the Attorney-General to provide expert advice 2008 which operated through the financial year 2008- on implementation of the VLRC recommendations 09. These divisions are the commercial general division, made in its Civil Justice Review Report, 2008. Judge the expedited cases division, the banking and finance Kennedy joined the Judicial Dispute Resolution Steering division, the family property division and the building Committee to assist with JDR programs offered by the cases division. Judicial College of Victoria. The banking and finance division, in particular, has The County Court remains committed to the provision seen exponential expansion, particularly in the last of expeditious methods of resolving commercial disputes three months of the financial year. Thus there was an by judges with experience in commercial litigation. average of 87 cases issued each month between April 2009 and June 2009 with 97 cases issued in June alone. At the time of writing, this newly created division was constituted by almost 400 active matters.
2008-09 Annual Report 23 civiL Lists AnD Divisions The following table illustrates the management of the Court’s Civil Lists and Divisions.
Commercial list Judge in Charge
Banking and Finance Division Judge Kennedy Building Cases Division Judge Shelton Expedited Cases Division Judge Anderson Family Property Division Judge Misso General Division Judge Anderson
Damages and Compensation list Judge in Charge
Defamation Division Judge Davis General Division Judge Davis Medical Division Judge Lawson, Judge Saccardo Serious Injury Division Judge Davis WorkCover Division Judge Wischusen
CommeRCIAl lISt
BuiLDing cAses Where appropriate, the appointment of a special Division referee, the ordering of a case conference or any other procedures, although novel, which may assist in the Special Rules for the hearing of expedition of the proceeding, are considered. building cases were introduced in the County Court in 1983. In Frequently applications are heard for summary particular, they provided for judgment under the Building & Construction Industry mediation. Although mediation is Security of Payment Act 2002. The purpose of this Act now an accepted step in civil is to provide for prompt payments to contractors and litigation with virtually all cases sub-contractors, given that ‘cash fl ow is the lifeblood in the County Court automatically of the building industry’. The principle ‘pay now, argue being referred to mediation, later’, is an underlying purpose of the legislation. There in 1983 this was a quite novel is also the occasional application for enforcement of an concept. It was the fi rst reference Judge Shelton adjudicator’s award under the Act. Applications under to mediation in statutory form in Australia. Judge in Charge, the Act are normally disposed of at the interlocutory stage. By the time the matter is listed for trial, such Building Cases The initial Judge in charge of the Building List was applications are normally overtaken by the contractual Division his Honour Judge Lazarus. His Honour Judge Kellam dispute between the parties. followed him upon his retirement in 1994 and then his Honour Judge Shelton, who is the present judge in Stay applications under s.57 of the Domestic Building charge of the Building Cases Division, followed him in & Contracts Act 1995 seeking that the proceeding be 1998 upon his appointment to the Supreme Court. stayed for reference to VCAT also feature at directions hearings. The underlying philosophy of the Building Cases Division, as of the Commercial List generally, is to have Cases are set down for trial at the earliest possible date, as much judicial intervention as is necessary but no normally considerably less than twelve months from more. This is achieved by effectively dealing with the date of issue. For the period covered by this report, mid- cases in two streams. 2008 to mid-2009, they were all set down for hearing before Judge Shelton. The fi rst stream utilises the administrative mention system whereby orders are made ‘on the papers’ and a There has been a considerable increase in the number matter may well reach trial without having previously of proceedings issued in the Building Cases Division come before a judge. Most cases proceed in this fashion. since the removal of the $200,000 jurisdictional limit at the end of 2006. In 2007, there were thirty-nine new The second stream utilises directions hearings where matters issued in the Building Cases Division. In the the parties cannot agree the orders to be made ‘on the twelve-month period under review, there were 114 papers’ or there is an application to be heard. These new matters. are heard by Judge Shelton on the second and fourth Wednesdays of each month or otherwise, at short notice, when a matter is urgent.
24 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m CIVIl JuRISDICtIon fAmIly pRopeRty DIVISIon juRisDiction The majority of case conferences are conducted by Judge Misso. Judges Davis and O’Neill have also During 2008-09, the number of applications fi led conducted a series of case conferences in domestic under Part IX of the Property Law Act 1958 (domestic partnership disputes. partnership disputes), and of the Administration and Probate Act 1958 (testator’s family maintenance claims) Since September 2008 well over 100 case conferences have increased markedly. been conducted with a relatively high settlement rate. On 1 December 2008 the Relationships Act 2008 The private profession has embraced the concept of commenced. It repealed Part IX replacing it with mirror case conferences to the extent that they have become a image provisions, and further provisions relevant to the preferred method of alternative or appropriate dispute determination of an order for adjustment of property resolution to private mediation. interests and maintenance. Judge Misso has recently developed a pilot scheme Parallel legislation was passed by the Victorian State to undertake judicial mediation in applications where Parliament and the Federal Parliament which has had the time estimate is three days or more. The private the effect of transferring the State jurisdiction under profession has likewise embraced the concept of the Relationships Act 2008 to the Family Court, but judicial mediation. not before proceedings where the domestic partners separated before 1 December 2008. The nature of domestic partnership disputes and testator’s family maintenance claims tend to be far more It is likely that be number of applications of this kind will amenable to resolution before trial. Case conferences reduce over the coming years. and judicial mediation have been highly successful in providing the parties an early opportunity to settle However, the number of applications fi led which were which is both an advantage to the parties in terms of given a trial date in 2009 exceeded the number fi led in saving of costs, but has also reduced the number of 2008 and in previous years. cases actually going to trial. List mAnAgement Consistently with the other specialist lists the Family Consistently with the other specialist lists each Property Division has continued to examine innovative application within the Family Property Division is case ways of undertaking case management, conducting managed. Orders are made tailored to the peculiar trials, and conducting alternative or a appropriate requirements of the application. dispute resolution. Directions hearings are held fortnightly at which time It is anticipated that in 2010 every case will be the practice court applications are heard and determined. subject of a case conference or judicial mediation by judges of the court at an early stage in the life of the ALteRnAtive (oR AppRopRiAte) litigation in order to provide the parties with the earliest Dispute ResoLution possible opportunity to resolve the litigation in the most cost-effective manner. Since September 2008 case conferences have been offered to parties as a substitute for private mediation in both domestic partnership disputes and testator’s family maintenance claims.
DAmAgeS AnD CompenSAtIon lISt meDicAL List the introduction of the administrative mention The Medical List is managed by Judge Lawson procedure has been towards alternating with Judge Saccardo. a decrease in the need for The Medical Division is established under Order 34A.04 judicial intervention in the of the Rules of Court. Order 34A.04(4) provides that the management of cases as Medical Division shall consist of any proceeding that practitioners make use consent includes a claim for damages in respect of death or bodily orders fi led under the system injury resulting from medical or the like treatment or to record compliance with advice given in respect of any physical or mental condition. timetables and court orders. A new Practice Note effective from 20 April 2009 There are bi-annual meetings changed the way that these proceedings are managed. held with the Medical List User Practitioners are now able to utilise the administrative Group to ensure that the list is Judge Saccardo, operating in a manner which mention procedure to obtain consent orders thereby Judge in Charge, meets needs of practitioners and appropriately balances minimising the number of Court appearances. Medical List the interests of the litigants within the list with the Judge Lawson and Judge Saccardo continue to demands upon the resources of the court. monitor all cases within the list to ensure that matters are progressing in a timely manner. The trend since
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 25 RegistRy The Chief Judge, CEO, Principal Registrar, and both the Criminal and Civil Listings Managers continued to meet weekly throughout the year, closely monitoring the Court’s sittings and case load. Our people SuppoRtIng A new Registry Management structure was established in December 2008 following the appointment of Katie O’Keeffe to the position of Principal Registrar. This was followed by appointments to the JuDgeS of Criminal Listings, Civil Listings and Client Services Manager roles within the Registry. tHe CouRt Two new positions were created to provide high level support to the Appropriate Dispute Resolution (ADR) pilot and the implementation of both the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Acts. The ADR Coordinator, appointed in December 2008, facilitates all requirements for ADR in relation to cases in the County Court’s civil jurisdiction. Within Registry, a Project Offi cer was appointed to identify and analyse the impact of the new legislation upon the Court’s processes and procedures. Registry managers continued to participate in Victoria University’s Curriculum Advisory Group in relation to the program content of With initiative, innovation the Certifi cate IV in Government (Court Services). Three Registry staff graduated with a Diploma in Government (Court Services) and commitment, Court in June 2009. staff support the Judges In April, Registry and Administration staff participated in a planning in their work. day to identify projects and initiatives for the year ahead. Circuit and Senior registrars Conference A successful conference was held in November 2008 for Circuit and Senior Registrars. The Chief Judge and several Judges also participated. Judge Sexton provided an interactive presentation about the Sexual Offences List on circuit. Guest speakers included representatives from the OPP, Corrections, Court’s Technology Group, the ADR Directorate, and the Courts and Tribunals Unit. Our Services Information on the Court’s eFiling service for documents and CourtConnect was distributed to practitioners during the year. By year end, 50% of documents lodged with Registry were received using eFiling. Our resources document management improvements Renovations were undertaken to provide a safer and more secure records inspection area in registry. The new layout offers increased visibility of the inspection/photocopying area, allowing registry staff to better monitor viewing of documents and fi les whilst providing increased privacy for practitioners. Additional copying facilities have enabled more inspection appointments and reduced waiting times. A six-month trial of a new criminal fi le structure commenced in June. The new design will assist in better managing Court documents.
26 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m SuppoRtIng JuDgeS of tHe CouRt c
AssociAtes professional development The Court established a new leadership position, In 2009, two all day seminars were held in February Learning and Development Associate (LDA), following a and June for Court Tipstaves. This year’s seminars twelve-month pilot program. Four Associates have been focussed on in-court technology (including an overview appointed to the role. The LDA position is responsible of upgrades completed and planned to court rooms in for training and the professional development of Melbourne and in the circuit locations) and a discussion Associates. The LDAs play a key role in workforce of the Court’s annual Action Plan. The seminars planning which is aimed at better shaping the role of the provided Tipstaves with an opportunity to contribute to Court Associate into the future. the development of the Court’s Action Plan. professional development The June seminar also featured a presentation on the Integrated Court Management System under The Associates’ seminars were held in February development and Dr Robert Gordon led a discussion and June at the County Court in Melbourne. The on dealing with trauma and the impact on Tipstaves of seminars focussed on information sharing, professional observing diffi cult courtroom hearings. development and innovation. Associates were briefed on the new Criminal Procedure legislation and Dr Robert training Gordon, Clinical Psychologist, led a session on managing stress. This session was repeated at the Tipstaves’ All newly appointed Tipstaves undergo an induction planning day. program prior to commencing their position in chambers and in Court. The training includes the use of Several Associates have participated in the user acceptance in-court technology and managing a jury. As a result training in preparation for the launch of ICMS. of changes to the operation of the Sexual Offences List, all Tipstaves were trained in the new court recording Finally, information sessions were scheduled throughout procedures. This year ten Associates were trained in the the year covering new developments affecting the role ‘Duties of the Tipstaff’. of the Associate. This included briefi ngs on Sexual Offence hearings and the operation of the County Koori Court. performance planning Tipstaves prepared individual performance and tipstAves development plans consistent with the Court’s tipstaves’ manual objectives and priorities. A new information and technical manual for Tipstaves was developed by Deputy Senior Tipstaff, Bob Cuskelly. The manual, launched at the Tipstaves’ seminar in June, provides Tipstaves with detailed descriptions of Court procedures and the responsibilities of the Tipstaff both in and out of Court. As the in-court technology installed in court rooms varies at each court, the manual is a useful reference for Tipstaves managing the IT facilities in the courtroom.
County Court Koori Court Project Manager, Rosemary Smith, recipient of the Secretary’s Award for her work establishing the County Koori Court.
2008 Victoria University Graduates Kate Spillane (Civil Listings Manager) and Nicole Saunders (Client Services Manager)
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 27 ReseARch unit At the County Court facility in Melbourne, eight trial courts were upgraded to Special Hearing court The Research Unit, comprising three offi cers, continued rooms. Special Hearing courts allow for the taping of to undertake a broad range of research work for the witness evidence or cross examination. This evidence Judges and other areas of the court, and relevant can be replayed at a later date for the benefi t of the training to Judge’s Associates. jury. Changes to the way Special Hearings and Queries were directed to all aspects of the Court’s subsequent trials are conducted made this upgrade jurisdiction with the exception of adoption. Particular essential. DVD recorders were installed in all Special foci were technical sentencing issues and the applicability Hearing courts, replacing video recorders. The time or otherwise of recent legislative reforms to particular delay in the Court’s access to information that requires cases. The unit provided ‘early warning’ in relation editing or copying using DVD technology is signifi cantly to signifi cant cases and upcoming legislative reform reduced in comparison to the use video equipment. particularly affecting the court. DVD and VHS editing suites have been built at all County Court locations. The unit assisted the work of court committees including the Rules Committee, Media Committee and Professional Touch panel technology has been installed in several trial Development Committee. courts facilitating easier operation of in-court facilities. In preparation for full transcript digitisation, fi bre optic The unit assisted in preparation for the Judges’ Annual cabling has been installed from the County Court to the seminar, and with court special projects such as support Court of Appeal. for the new Koori Court, presentations to the public, and a student education kit. QuALity AssuRAnce pRoject secRetARiAL suppoRt to the juDges A County Court quality council was established to manage the implementation of a process-based, Judges’ secretaries provided essential administrative data quality management system. Regular audits of support to County Court Judges, preparing draft and data quality have highlighted the areas in need of fi nal copy of judicial documents to Judges with accuracy improvement and the County Court quality council has and effi ciency. The Court’s increasing case load directly played a critical role in implementing and monitoring the impacts the workload in this area. changes to Court processes.
integRAteD LiBRARy mAnAgement county couRt enviRonment system (iLms) committee The Court’s Integrated Library Management System The County Court Environment Committee was (ILMS) provides a single-managed environment for established in July 2008. The aims of the Committee are the Court’s Sentences and Judgments. Using ILMS, as follows: the Court can track and link cases to Court of Appeal decisions. On its release next year, this internal database 1. To develop initiatives to reduce the County Court’s will be made available to other agencies, such as the impact on the environment Adult Parole Board, Sex Offender Management Branch 2. To prioritise and implement environmental initiatives and Corrections Victoria Clinical Services. Access to the database will assist these Agencies in effi ciently fulfi lling 3. To promote environmentally-related activities their roles and responsibilities. across the County Court 4. To promote and lead by example, actions and in-couRt technoLogy activities that reduce environmental impacts in our Several technological improvements were made to work areas court rooms in Melbourne and at the Circuit locations during the year. Infra Red Hearing systems were installed A waste audit was undertaken to identify areas of the in twelve regional courts. This system uses wireless Court which required immediate and ongoing attention headsets and provides better sound quality when in order to reduce the Court’s and Court user’s impact replaying poor quality original audio recordings such on the environment within and surrounding the County as VATE tapes and surveillance audio. The headsets are Court facility. provided to the Judge, jury members and the parties.
28 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m SuppoRtIng JuDgeS of tHe CouRt
FAciLity mAnAgement couRt usAge The Chief Judge, Judges of the Court, registry and A total of 342 more days were used than reserved in administrative staff extend their thanks to the General the period July 2008 to June 2009. This result is due Manager, Ian Grummitt and his staff at The Liberty to signifi cant use (323 days) by the Supreme Court Group for the effi cient service provided by TLG and during the year. Court usage by the Bushfi res Royal their service partners during the year. Commission was 17 days. In June 2009 in collaboration with TLG and other stakeholders, the Court has engaged in a review of the emergency management plans for the facility. In line with a generally increased focus on security and emergency matters, the work of the Security and Emergency Management Planning Committee (formed when the building was fi rst occupied in 2002) was split across two committees, one to manage emergency management and recovery procedures, the other to deal with security issues. The work of each of these committees is collaborative between the Court and other stakeholders. The Court revised and expanded its Business Continuity Plan in early 2009. The plan sets out guidelines for a range of contingencies which might limit the court’s capacity to conduct its regular business. We test our plans on a regular basis by engaging managers and staff in scenario exercises. The Occupational Health and Safety Committee also works collaboratively with other stakeholders. Its regular monthly meetings, chaired by Judge McInerney, are the forum for discussion of matters such as manual handling, safe work practices and staff professional development. This is the seventh year of the contract with The Liberty Group (TLG) to manage the County Court facility. TLG continues to demonstrate the value of the partnership with the Court. The responsiveness of TLG and its service partners – Honeywell, G4S and Interform – is always, timely, friendly and solution-focussed.
CUMULATIVE YTD COURT USAGE 2008-09 10000
8000
6000 Monthly Usage Monthly 4000 Reserved No of Cumulative Days No of Cumulative
2000
0 Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 29 n accordance with legislation introduced in 2007 regarding professional development for Judicial offi cers, Judges of the Court attended 183 Idays of professional development throughout the year including the Court’s Annual Seminar, attendance at activities of the Judicial College of Victoria and participation in conferences and seminars organised JuDICIAl by other Judicial organisations. A summary is provided below. county couRt AnnuAL counciL oF juDges seminAR pRofeSSIonAl The Judges’ Annual Seminar was held at Torquay on 20-21 February 2009. Twelve break-out sessions were conducted covering DeVelopment developments in the civil and criminal spheres. Guest speakers were: • Professor The Hon George Hampel QC of the Faculty of Law, Monash University, in relation to preparing and delivering oral judgments and sentences; • Mr Justice Ashley, Victorian Court of Appeal, in relation to serious injury applications; • Mr Mark Pedley, Deputy Director, Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, Victoria, in relation to sentencing on commonwealth matters.
county KooRi couRt WoRKshop In preparation for the commencement of sittings at the County Koori Court, Judges and the CEO joined Elders and Respected Persons (ERPs), prosecutors and service providers at a four-day workshop held 27-31 October, 2008. Chief Judge Rozenes, Judge Grant, Judge Lawson, Judge Parsons and Judge Smallwood participated in the workshop which was held at the Latrobe Valley Law Courts, the venue for the fi rst County Koori Court. The workshop program included a mock court, sentencing sessions and a discussion of the appeals process.
juDiciAL inDuction pRogRAm The Court’s Judicial Induction program is a two-week orientation program designed to provide newly appointed Judges with Judicial and administrative support following their appointment to the Court. As well as spending time observing court proceedings, the program includes procedural sessions run by experienced Judges, a formal swearing-in and welcome, and time to prepare for the fi rst court sitting. Experienced Judges also act as mentors to their newly appointed colleagues. Six Judges participated in the two-week program in 2008-09. national judicial orientation program (national judicial college of Australia) 4-8 August 2008, Broadbeach, Qld. The primary objective of the program is to assist newly appointed judicial offi cers with their transition to judicial offi ce by facilitating the development and refi nement of the skills, knowledge and attitudes necessary for effective judging. The program is designed to offer insights into the role and responsibilities of a member of the judiciary, provide the opportunity for new appointees to benefi t from the knowledge and experience of senior judges who attend the program as speakers, and to provide an opportunity for the exchange of ideas and experiences among participants. In attendance were: Judge KL Bourke, Judge Cotterell, Judge Gucciardo, Judge Lacava, Judge Misso, Judge Patrick, Judge I Ross, Judge Thornton, Judge Wischusen, Judge Wodak
30 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m JuDICIAl pRofeSSIonAl DeVelopment
national judicial orientation program Biennial conference of District and county court (national judicial college of Australia) judges of Australia and new Zealand 15-20 March 2009, Melbourne. 24-27 June 2009, Sydney. In attendance were: Judge Gamble, Judge Mason, The education program covered issues as varied as Judge Saccardo, Judge Taft climate change, human rights and indigenous issues. The program also promoted insight into challenges affecting pARticipAtion in juDiciAL coLLege judicial performance such as prejudice and stress. oF victoRiA (jcv) Activities judicial conference of Australia (jcA) colloquium Throughout the year, Judges of the County Court 10-12 October 2008, Gold Coast. attended workshops and seminars organised by the Judicial College of Victoria. Judges participated in The Colloquium program included sessions on the 83 days of professional development through their Charter of Human Rights, Environmental Rights, the attendance at workshops and briefi ngs. In total, 181 rights of workers and the balance between the public’s Judges attended thirty four sessions which covered ‘right to know’ and the individual’s ‘right to privacy’. topics such as the Evidence Act 2008, Cyber Crime, Aboriginal People and the Justice System, Mental juDges contRiBution to Health, Sexual Assault, Sudanese Cultural Awareness pRoFessionAL DeveLopment Within and, Child and Cognitively Impaired Witnesses. the LegAL pRoFession phoenix judges program Throughout the year, County Court judges were (national judicial college of Australia) involved in a range of professional development 2-5 March 2009, Canberra. opportunities for lawyers and barristers organised by their respective associations. The event is a ‘refresher program’, with the aim of giving experienced judges the opportunity to revisit key areas of • Chief Judge: Address to Bar Council (August 2008) their work, to refl ect on their role as judges, and to exchange • Chief Judge: Address to Bar Readers information on how they discharge that role by interaction (October 2008) with experienced colleagues from other jurisdictions. • Chief Judge: CLR Session for members of the AttenDAnce At conFeRences Victorian Bar on Criminal Procedures Amendment Act (August 2008) In addition to participating in programs offered by the JCV, Judges also attended judicial and professional • Judge Harbison: Elder Law & Ethics Conference development conferences convened by other judicial 2009 (Law Institute of Victoria CPD) organisations. • Judge Misso: Succession (Wills & Estates) Law judicial Reasoning conference Conference 2008 (Law Institute of Victoria CPD) 7-8 February 2009, Canberra. • Judge Misso: Family Law Conference 2008 (Law Institute of Victoria CPD) The Conference examined how judges judge, and explored how judges’ reasoning is infl uenced by a range of factors, • Judge Patrick: Appearing in a Crimes Family including: social, neurological, biological and psychological. Violence Matter (Law Institute Young Lawyers) judicial conference of Australia (jcA) • Judge Wodak: Medicine and Law Conference 2008 – governing council (Law Institute of Victoria) 12-13 June 2009, Brisbane. In addition County Court Judges convened a discussion The Governing Council comprises a representative from program for junior practitioners. Sessions were held regularly every court in each State and Territory. The role of the throughout the year from August 2008 – May 2009. Governing Council is to consider issues before the Judicial Conference of Australia. Conference sessions covered the Judicial Appointments Project, Complaints Against Judicial Offi cers Project, discussions as to judgment writing time, a report of the President attending the Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs Inquiry into Australia’s Judicial System and the Role of Judges, the development of a JCA Scholarship Program to promote a Social Justice Program, superannuation issues in regard to Federal Court Judges and issues concerning the appointment of Acting Judges and Acting Magistrates in Victoria. Judge McInerney attended this conference on behalf of County Court Judges.
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 31 JuDgeS’ to JuDICIAl BoDIeS AnD pRofeSSIonAl ContRIButIon oRgAnISAtIonS
tribunals & Boards Judges
Adult Parole Board Judge Douglas Judge Rizkalla
Forensic Leave Panel Judge Davis Judge Gaynor Judge Howard Judge Pullen
Judicial College of Chief Judge Rozenes Victoria Board
Racing Appeals Tribunal Board Judge Hicks Judge Nixon His Honour Judge Dyett His Honour Judge Williams (ret. Oct 2008)
Victoria Law Foundation Board Judge Lacava Judge Patrick
Victorian Civil and Judge Bowman (Vice-President) Administrative Tribunal Judge Davis (Vice-President) Judge Harbison (Vice-President) Judge I Ross (Vice-President)
Youth Parole Board and Youth Judge M Bourke (Chair) Residential Board Judge Allen (Alternate Chair)
32 County CouRt of VICtoRIA m JuDgeS ContRIButIon c
Councils, Committees & Reference Groups Judges
Adoptions Committee Judge Campbell (Chair) Judge Harbison
Appeal Costs Act Committee Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Punshon Judge Smallwood
Child Witness Advisory Committee Judge Sexton
Child Witness Committee Judge Howard Judge Sexton
Civil Procedure Advisory Group Judge Anderson Judge Davis
Courts Consultative Council Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Coate Judge Grant
Editorial Procedure Project, Editorial and Steering Committee Judge Hannan Judge Howard Judge Taft
Integrated Courts Management System Judicial Committee Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Coate
IT Committee Judge Jenkins
Judicial Assistance Committee Judge Campton
Judicial College of Victoria Charge Book Committee Judge Morrish Judge Pullen Judge Rizkalla
Judicial College of Victoria Joint Management Committee Judge Misso
Judicial College of Victoria Syllabus Advisory Committee Judge Gucciardo Judge Wilmoth
Koori Court Reference Group Chief Judge Rozenes (Chair) Judge Grant Judge Lawson Judge Parsons Judge Rizkalla Judge Smallwood
Law Reform Committee Judge Jenkins (Chair) Judge M Bourke Judge Bowman Judge Gaynor Judge Hampel
Media Committee Judge Millane (Chair) Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Gucciardo Judge Mason Judge Saccardo Judge Shelton Judge Wilmoth
Professional Development Committee Judge Wilmoth (Chair) Judge Anderson Judge Cohen Judge Hampel Judge Wilmoth Judge Mullaly
Rules Committee Judge Misso (Chair) Judge Cohen Judge Murphy Judge O’Neill
2008-09 AnnuAl RepoRt 33 Councils, Committees & Reference Groups Judges Cont…
Sexual Assault Advisory Committee Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Grant Judge Hannan Judge Sexton
Supreme Court Litigation Committee Judge Anderson Judge Davis
Victorian Sentencing Manual Editorial Committee Judge Douglas Judge Patrick
Wellness Committee Judge Campton (Chair) Judge Nicholson
Professional organisations Judges
Australian Institute of Judicial Administration Child Witness Judge Sexton Benchbook Committee
Australian Institute of Judicial Administration Education Committee Judge Wodak (Apr 2009)
Judicial Conference of Australia Orientation Program Steering Committee Judge Wodak (Apr 2009)
Judicial Conference of Australia Governing Council Judge McInerney (Representative) Judge Lewitan (Alternate Representative)
Law Institute of Victoria, Family Law Section, Courts Practice Committee Judge Misso
Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine Judge Coate Judge Sexton
Victorian Law Reform Commission Judge Hampel Judge I Ross
Court User Groups Judges
Banking and Finance List User Group Judge Kennedy (Chair)
Building List User Group Judge Shelton (Chair)
Commercial List User Group Judge Anderson (Chair)
Criminal User Group Judge Punshon (Chair) Chief Judge Rozenes Judge Howard Judge Rizkalla Judge Sexton
Family Property Division User Group Judge Misso (Chair)
Medical List User Group Judge Lawson Judge Saccardo Judge Wodak (Apr 2009)
Serious Injury Applications User Group Judge Davis Judge O’Neill
Sex Offences List User Group Judge Sexton (Chair) Judge Pullen
34 County CouRt of VICtoRIA judges of the county court
His Honour Judge Christopher Miles O’Neill 24 Jul 2007 Judges of the County Court Date of as at 30 June 2009 Appointment His Honour Judge Duncan Leslie Allen 21 Aug 2007 His Honour Judge Iain James Kerr Ross, A.O. 23 Oct 2007 His Honour Chief Judge Michael Rozenes 25 Nov 2002 His Honour Judge Philip Gerard Misso 11 Dec 2007 His Honour Judge Edward Charles Stuart Campbell 7 Jun 1994 Her Honour Judge Katherine Louise Bourke 11 Dec 2007 His Honour Judge Michael Gerard McInerney 21 Jun 1994 Her Honour Judge Jane Marie Josephine Patrick 15 Apr 2008 Her Honour Judge Margaret Ann Rizkalla 11 Jul 1994 His Honour Judge Peter Michael Edward Wischusen 15 Apr 2008 His Honour Judge Francis Julian Shelton 5 Sep 1994 His Honour Judge Paul Gregory Lacava 27 May 2008 Her Honour Judge Marilyn Blanche Harbison 5 Feb 1996 His Honour Judge Frank Robert Gucciardo 27 May 2008 His Honour Judge Timothy Mark Holt 7 Oct 1997 Her Honour Judge Christine Anne Thornton 14 Jul 2008 Her Honour Judge Carolyn Dianne Douglas 7 Oct 1997 His Honour Judge Philip Mark Taft 29 Sep 2008 His Honour Judge Tim Deneys Wood, R.F.D. 2 Dec 1997 His Honour Judge Frank Saccardo 2 Feb 2009 His Honour Judge Ian Campbell Robertson 19 Jan 1998 His Honour Judge Mark Andrew Gamble 3 Feb 2009 His Honour Judge Graham Richard Anderson 17 Mar 1998 His Honour Judge Howard Mason 3 Feb 2009 His Honour Judge Lansell David Pilgrim 7 Apr 1999 His Honour Judge Gerard Paul Mullaly 7 Apr 2009 Her Honour Judge Pamela Dawn Jenkins 21 Apr 1999 Her Honour Judge Jennifer Ann Coate 22 Jun 2000 Date of His Honour Judge John Richard Bowman 20 Feb 2001 Acting Judges Election Her Honour Judge Rachelle Ann Lewitan, A.M. 16 May 2001 His Honour Judge Graeme Reuben Glover Crossley 31 Jul 2003 Her Honour Judge Julie Ann Nicholson 3 Jul 2001 His Honour Judge James Thomas Duggan 1 Mar 2008 His Honour Judge Graeme Geoffrey Hicks 20 Aug 2001 His Honour Judge John Arthur Smallwood 20 Aug 2001 Date of Her Honour Judge Susan Michele Cohen 20 Aug 2001 Acting Judges Appointment Her Honour Judge Meryl Elizabeth Sexton 20 Aug 2001 His Honour Judge Leslie Charles Ross 4 May 2005 Her Honour Judge Frances Elizabeth Hogan 2 Oct 2001 His Honour Judge John King Nixon 18 Jul 2007 Her Honour Judge Irene Elizabeth Lawson 26 Mar 2002 His Honour Judge Anthony Philip Duckett, OBE 26 Sep 2007 His Honour Judge Giuseppe Gullaci 4 Jun 2002 Her Honour Judge Barbara Ann Cotterell 12 May 2008 His Honour Judge Michael Patrick Bourke 10 Sep 2002 His Honour Judge William Rex White 2 Aug 2008 Her Honour Judge Elizabeth Mary Gaynor 10 Sep 2002 His Honour Judge Phillip James Coish 10 Sep 2002 Registrar Date of His Honour Judge Kenneth Ross Howie 22 Oct 2002 Appointment Her Honour Judge Jane Anne Campton 22 Oct 2002 Ms Katie O’Keeffe 1 Dec 2008 His Honour Judge Roy Francis Punshon 8 Apr 2003 Her Honour Judge Wendy Anne Wilmoth 8 Apr 2003 Appointments and Retirements Date of Appointment His Honour Judge Geoffrey Thomas Chettle 2 Dec 2003 Her Honour Judge Frances Millane 2 Dec 2003 Her Honour Judge C A Thornton appointed as a Judge 14 Jul 2008 Her Honour Judge Sandra Sabrina Davis 26 Oct 2004 His Honour Judge P M Taft appointed as a Judge 29 Sep 2008 Her Honour Judge Felicity Pia Hampel 9 Feb 2005 His Honour Judge L R Hart retired a Judge 11 Oct 2008 Her Honour Judge Jeanette Gita Morrish 9 Aug 2005 His Honour R G Williams retired as a Judge 31 Oct 2008 His Honour Judge Julian Peter Leckie 9 Aug 2005 His Honour Judge F Saccardo appointed as a Judge 2 Feb 2009 His Honour Judge Paul Douglas Grant 26 Apr 2006 His Honour Judge M A Gamble appointed as a Judge 3 Feb 2009 His Honour Judge David Anthony Parsons 22 Aug 2006 His Honour Judge H Mason appointed as a Judge 3 Feb 2009 Her Honour Judge Susan Elizabeth Pullen 22 Aug 2006 His Honour D E Morrow retired as a Judge 23 Mar 2009 His Honour Judge Anthony John Howard 3 Oct 2006 His Honour Judge G P Mullaly appointed as a Judge 7 Apr 2009 Her Honour Judge Lisa Anne Hannan 3 Oct 2006 His Honour T G Wodak retired as a Judge 8 Apr 2009 His Honour Judge Michael Damian Murphy 24 Oct 2006 His Honour J H Barnett retired as a Judge 29 May 2009 Her Honour Judge Maree Evelyn Kennedy 1 May 2007
2008-09 Annual Report 35 goveRnAnce oF the couRt
constitution oF the county couRt executive of the Council of Judges nder s. 4 County Court Act 1958 the County The Chief Judge restructured the Court’s governance Court is constituted by the Chief Judge, model effective January, 2009. uJudges of the County Court and the Registrar of the Court. The judicial administration of the Court Judges’ Executive meets bi-monthly. Current is the responsibility of the Council of Judges, which members of the Executive are Chief Judge Rozenes, includes all Judges of the Court, including Acting Judge Anderson, Judge Bowman (Chair), Judge Davis, Judges appointed after the commencement of s. 7 of Judge Hampel, Judge Howard, Judge Lacava, the Courts Legislation (Judicial Appointments and Other Judge McInerney, Judge O’Neill, Judge Rizkalla, Amendments) Act 2005. Judge Sexton and Judge Wilmoth. The Executive supports the Council of Judges and the Chief Judge the Jurisdiction of the Court in the judicial administration of the court. As the major trial court in Victoria, the Court’s The new County Court Judicial Management Group jurisdiction is as follows: was convened and commenced meeting in February, 2009. Members of this group are Chief Judge Rozenes; cRiminAL juRisDiction Judge Howard and Judge Punshon (representing the The Court can hear all indictable offences, except Criminal jurisdiction); Judge Anderson and Judge Davis treason, murder and related offences. The broad range (representing Civil jurisdiction); Judge Bowman (Chair) of offences heard includes serious theft, armed robbery, representing judicial administration; the CEO and drug traffi cking and associated offences, sexual offences, Principal Registrar. fraud and dishonesty charges, serious assault and affray, and income and sales tax offences. Most cases arise from county couRt RuLes committee State legislation, but a proportion of the cases are based During the year, the County Court Rules of Procedure in Commonwealth legislation. in Civil Proceedings 1999 and the County Court Miscellaneous Rules 1999 were due to sunset under the civiL juRisDiction Subordinate Legislation Act 1994, following 10 years of The County Court has unlimited jurisdiction in all operation. These rules were reviewed and replaced. civil matters. Cases heard in this jurisdiction include The Rule changes for the period 1 July 2008 – commercial matters, building disputes, damages arising 30 June 2009 were: from a wide range of incidents including medical negligence, serious injury and defamation. The Court county court (chapter i Amendment no. 25) Rules 2008. has original jurisdiction in WorkCover matters. These Rules substituted an increased scale of costs to the County Court Rules of Procedure in Civil Proceedings Rules cRiminAL AppeALs 1999. This was effected by a substitution of Appendix A. The Court hears appeals from the criminal jurisdiction county court civil procedure Rules (sR. 148/2008). of the Magistrates’ Court and the criminal and family The object of these Rules was to replace the 1999 divisions of the Children’s Court. Civil Rules. The 2008 Rules are substantially similar but include technical changes, the use of gender ADoption AnD chAnge oF nAme neutral language and some minor alterations. Internal The Court has jurisdiction to make orders relating to numbering was largely maintained to ensure consistency adoption and change of name. with the Supreme Court Rules and to facilitate use by practitioners. counciL oF juDges county court miscellaneous Rules (sR. 56/2009). Pursuant to s. 87(1) County Court Act 1958 the Council The object of these Rules was to remake with of Judges is required to meet at least once per year to amendments Chapter II of the Rules of the County consider the Act and the Rules, the duties of the offi cers Court which establish procedures for certain of the Court, and to consider the system of procedure miscellaneous proceedings in the Court. The new Rules and administration. The Council of Judges met on three are substantially the same as the 1999 Rules apart from occasions in 2008-09. technical changes, the use of gender neutral language Matters considered by the Council included the changes and some minor alterations to refl ect current procedure to the operation civil jurisdiction in the Court, rule and new legislation. changes and the internal governance of the Court.
36 County CouRt of VICtoRIA Operating Statement and Financial Summary
COLLECTIONhe OF Operating FINES Statement AND FEES and Financial Summary (Consolidated setsFunds) out the revenue (in the form of fines and OPERATING EXPENDITURE 9,000 Tfees collected) and operational expenditure 25,000 of the Court for the year ended 30 June 2009, 8,000 including comparisons with 2007-08 (see below). Victorian Government Departments are required 20,000 7,000 to produce their annual reports in accordance with Standing Direction 4 Financial Management Reporting Judicial Salaries 6,000 of the Financial Management Act 1994. Information from and On-Costs 15,000 5,000 entities of the Department of Justice, suchCourt as Fines the Court, Staff Salaries are consolidated into the Department of Justice and On-Costs 4,000 Annual Report. Court Fees 10,000 Operating Costs 3,000 Photocopy Fees The County Court Operating Amortisation 2,000 Statement is consolidated into 5,000 and Depreciation 1,000 the Department of Justice $’000’s Annual Report. $’000’s 2007-08 2008-09 2007-08 2008-09
Special Appropriations COLLECTION OF FINES AND FEES The Judicial Remuneration Tribunal (JRT) (Consolidated Funds) OPERATING EXPENDITURE recommendation for a salary increase for Judges was implemented. 9,000 25,000 8,000 Annual Appropriations 20,000 The impact of the Victorian Public Service Agreement 7,000 2006 provided for a general salary increase. Judicial Salaries 6,000 and On-Costs 15,000 Efficiencies in operating expenditure were offset by 5,000 Court Fines Staff Salaries the implementation of the Koori Court ($490K) and and On-Costs a detailed Circuit Review conducted by the Boston 4,000 Court Fees 10,000 Operating Consulting Group.($100K) Costs 3,000 Photocopy Fees Amortisation and Depreciation Amortisation 2,000 5,000 and Depreciation Capital Purchases include a cost component for Finance Lease Repayments, Motor Vehicles. For the financial 1,000 year 2008-2009, the cost was $471,728 compared with $’000’s $’000’s $427,357 for the previous financial year. 2007-08 2008-09 2007-08 2008-09
Operating Statement for year ended 30 June, 2009. 2008-09 2007-08 $ $ Collection of Fines and Fees Court Fines 422,302 312,675 Court Fees 6,511,351 5,561,738 Court Photocopy Fees ** 1,186,284 0 Revenue 8,119,937 5,874,413
Operational Expenditure Judicial Salaries and On-Costs 20,813,823 19,859,793 Output Expenditure, comprising: Staff Salaries and On-Costs 11,891,661 10,476,996 Operating Costs ** 3,985,756 2,716,640 Amortisation and Depreciation 489,981 440,866 Total Operational Expenditure 37,181,221 33,494,295
** Note: The accounting treatment of Photocopy Fees was amended in 2008/2009 from an expense recoup in Operating costs to a Revenue classification.
2008-09 Annual Report 37 Judges of the County Court are committed to delivering fair and accessible justice to all Victorians.
the yeAR AheAD
n the year ahead, the Court will continue to focus on Criminal Procedures Act 2008 and Uniform Evidence a range of initiatives to reduce trial delay. A review Act 2009 of Circuit Court operations, the introduction of ADR I • To address Court delay by implementing and a restructure of registry processes demonstrate the recommendations of the review of Circuit Court’s commitment to this agenda. Court operations In addition, the Court will introduce several programs • To provide ongoing training opportunities for that address the needs of offenders and self-represented Judges and to develop a staff training plan litigants whilst also improving the services offered to practitioners. • To establish, document and implement a data quality framework for the Court and to audit the Court’s A description of the major projects appears below. performance • To continue monitoring case volume and outcomes • To review and to improve services provided of the County Koori Court pilot to self represented clients including civil litigants and • To assist in the evaluation of the Mental Health accused Practitioner pilot at the Court • To upgrade the County Court website • To monitor sex offender clinical assessment pilot and • To implement an Associates’ Workforce Plan and to participate in the evaluation process to design and deliver a Tipstaff Workforce Plan • To facilitate increased ADR hearings at the Court • To establish on-site support for Judges and staff by and to achieve target rate piloting a Peer Support Program • To participate in the consultation process of The County Court’s strategic priorities for the the Civil legislative review, ensuring any reallocation 2009-10 fi nancial year are available on the Court’s of resources has minimal impact on website (countycourt.vic.gov.au). This document details the Court’s operation a complete list of the Court’s Judicial and operational • To revise rules and operating procedures in initiatives for the forthcoming year. preparation for the implementation of the new
Photographs reproduced with kind permission: Anna Bolger, Bindi Cole, Victorian Bushfi res Royal Commission, Trust for Young Australians Permission granted for the illustration of the Lady of Justice by William Eicholtz.
38 County CouRt of VICtoRIA
250 William Street, melbourne, Victoria 3000 telephone: 8636 6510 www.countycourt.vic.gov.au printed using recycled paper