MAGISTRATES COURT Tasmania

ANNUAL REPORT For the year ended 30 June 2005

Criminal Division

Civil Division

Tribunals

Coronial

Phone/Fax: 03 6336 2615 MAGISTRATES CHAMBERS DX: 70121, Launceston PO Box 551 Launceston Website: Tasmania 7250 www.courts.tas.gov.au/magistrate

30 November 2005 The Honourable Judy Jackson MHA Attorney-General Level 10 10 Murray Street HOBART 7000 Dear Attorney, MAGISTRATES COURT ANNUAL REPORTS 2004-2005 I take pleasure in enclosing a volume that contains my Annual Reports with regard to the Magistrates Court as required by the: • Magistrates Court Act 1987, section 17C; and • Coroners Act 1995 section 69

Yours sincerely

AG Shott CHIEF MAGISTRATE

Contents COURT STATEMENTS ...... 1

VISION ...... 1 VALUES ...... 1 PREFACE ...... 1

INTRODUCTION...... 1 SAFE AT HOME...... 1 CRIMES ...... 1 DIGITAL RECORDING AND VIDEO-CONFERENCING ...... 1 THE COURT’S APPELLATE FUNCTIONS ...... 1 MAGISTRATES ...... 2 THE COURT AND ITS NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL INVOLVEMENT ...... 2 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...... 2 CRIMINAL AND GENERAL DIVISION ...... 4 CIVIL DIVISION...... 4 TRIBUNALS ...... 4 CORONIAL DIVISION ...... 4 OVERVIEW MAGISTRATES COURT...... 5

THE MAGISTRATES COURT ...... 5 CRIMINAL & GENERAL DIVISION ...... 6 CIVIL DIVISION...... 7 TRIBUNALS ...... 8 ADMINISTRATION ...... 8 DIVISIONS OF THE COURT...... 16

YOUTH JUSTICE DIVISION...... 18 CHILDREN’S DIVISION...... 20 ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS DIVISION (AAD) ...... 26 RESIDENTIAL TENANCIES...... 26 RELATIONSHIPS ACT ...... 27 ANTI-DISCRIMINATION TRIBUNAL ...... 29 MOTOR ACCIDENTS COMPENSATION TRIBUNAL ...... 34 MINING DIVISION...... 35 FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 41 CORONIAL INQUESTS OF SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INTEREST ...... 41 TASMANIAN ROAD SAFETY COUNCIL ...... 42 TASMANIAN TRANSPORT INDUSTRY SAFETY GROUP...... 44 DISASTER PLANNING ...... 44 TASMANIAN SUICIDE PREVENTION STEERING COMMITTEE (TSPSC) ...... 45 AUSTRALASIAN CORONERS’ SOCIETY INC ...... 46 MORTUARY AMBULANCE SERVICE ...... 46

COURT OBJECTIVES - 2005-2006...... 49

CRIMES IT SYSTEM ...... 49 SAFE AT HOME FAMILY VIOLENCE ACT 2004 IMPLEMENTATION...... 50 CRIMINAL & GENERAL DIVISION LEGISLATION...... 50 CIVIL REGISTRY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ...... 50 CIVIL DIVISION...... 57 TRIBUNALS ...... 60 CRIMINAL DIVISION ...... 64 CORONIAL ...... 65 PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2004-2005 ...... 67 CASE MANAGEMENT...... 69 COURTS...... 73

APPENDICES Appendix A Tasmanian Legislation Administered in the Magistrates Court Appendix B Statistics Appendix C Financial Statement Appendix D Court Locations Appendix E Organisational structure

Page ii

COURT statements

Mission Values

Mission Statement Judicial independence • to ensure that the Court, as part of the third arm

of government, remains independent in the The mission of the Magistrates Court of Tasmania is to serve the community by providing access to an exercise of its judicial functions from the accountable, independent and impartial system of Executive and Legislature, and is understood by justice administered according to law. the community to be so. • to be aware of the context in which administrative support for the Court is provided by the Executive Government to the intent, however, that in delivering its services to the community the Magistrates Court has control over, and is accountable for, its administration to the maximum extent consistent with its role and responsibilities within the justice system.

Accountability Vision • to be accountable for the performance of our judicial and administrative functions • to use our resources efficiently and effectively in Vision Statement accordance with sound practice and principle

The Magistrates Court of Tasmania has as its vision the achievement of professionalism and excellence in Community trust and confidence the timely, effective and efficient access to, and • to be independent and to act independently administration of, a cohesive system of justice for the • to act impartially and without bias benefit of the community; and to maintain the rule of • to demonstrate integrity law. • to seek feedback from the Court’s users

Professionalism • to pursue excellence in the services we provide • to take pride in our work • to demonstrate responsiveness to our clients and stakeholders • to maintain respect - from and for the community, and for each other • to ensure properly trained staff • to deliver a high quality of service • to maintain a friendly and happy work environment • to value team work • to recognise and use effectively the knowledge of

all officers of the Court

PREFACE

Introduction

This volume contains two reports: • The Annual Report as required by the Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 17C in respect of each “lower Court”, and • The Annual Report as required by the Coroners Act 1995 section 69 in respect of the Magistrates Court (Coronial Division).

Once again, I am pleased to be able to report that the year has been one of substantial achievement for the Magistrates Court.

This volume details those achievements and the work of the Court generally. However, I wish to emphasize some particular matters of significance.

Safe at home

The enactment of the Family Violence Act 2004 and its commencement on 30 March, 2005, placed very substantial demands upon both the judicial and administrative resources of the Magistrates Court. I believe the Court met the judicial and administrative challenges that this legislation posed and I acknowledge with pride the efforts of all officers of the Court who worked so hard to ensure that that occurred.

CRIMES

The Court’s statewide Criminal Registry Management and Enquiry System has proven itself to be an effective and cost efficient tool for managing a wide range of Registry functions. Enhancements to the system continue and the Court is looking forward to the development and implementation of CRIMES Stage 2 which will significantly enhance the functionality of the system.

Digital recording and video-conferencing

During the year, all registry court rooms were fitted with digital recording systems which replaced the analogue cassette recorders which had become unreliable. All proceedings of the Magistrates Court are audio recorded and the new digital equipment has greatly improved the reliability of the recording system, the accessibility of the recorded material and the quality of its reproduction. The Court’s video conferencing network continues to justify its presence in the court system. The savings and other advantages, not only to government but to all affected court users, continue to justify the establishment and maintenance of the network.

The Court’s appellate functions

I draw attention to the appellate roles of the Magistrates Court. Preface

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 1

This Report sets out in detail the jurisdictions of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal, the Motor Accidents Compensation Tribunal and the Administrative Appeals Division of the Magistrates Court. I take this opportunity to highlight the increasing importance of these appellate functions which are consuming significant amounts of the Court’s resources in view of the complexity of some cases which are being heard and determined on appeal.

Magistrates

The Court welcomed Magistrate Melanie Bartlett as a Temporary Magistrate on 23 May, 2005, and Magistrate Olivia McTaggart as a permanent full-time magistrate on 10 June, 2005. Further, shortly after the end of the reporting period on 25 July, 2005, the Court also welcomed Magistrate Glenn Hay as a Temporary Magistrate. The Commissions of Magistrates Hay and Bartlett and that of Temporary Magistrate Merrin McKay, who took up appointment in June, 2004, expire on 23 December, 2005. The temporary appointments were made in order to permit the taking by magistrates of accumulated leave without thereby interfering with the timeliness of the disposal of the Court’s caseload.

The Court and its national and international involvement

The Court continued its support of: • the Council of Australian Chief Magistrates, which met during the year in Adelaide and in Launceston when the Court had the honour of being the host Court, • the Council of Heads of Coronial Jurisdictions, which met twice during the year. • the South Pacific Council of Youth and Children’s Courts (which comprises the heads of Youth Courts of Australia, Fiji, Kiribati, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu, and • the Australasian Coroners Society Inc. • The Tasmanian community continues to be a beneficiary of these nation-wide and international contacts.

Acknowledgments

I acknowledge the unceasing and greatly appreciated support of the Attorney-General, the Honourable Judy Jackson, MHA, for the Magistrates Court as well as her cooperation and that of her staff. Further, I wish to acknowledge my appreciation to Mr Peter Hoult, the Secretary of the Department of Justice, and to his Deputy, Ms Lisa Hutton, for their unfailing cooperation and assistance. I am pleased to report the existence of a most constructive working relationship with them. Similarly, I acknowledge with gratitude the assistance that has been provided to me as Chief Magistrate by the staff of the central office of Department of Justice.

Page 2

In addition, I express my appreciation to the Justices of the Peace who are authorised pursuant to the Justices Act 1959 section 23AB to perform Bench Duty and to the Court volunteers for their services. As I have indicated previously, they provide valuable and selfless service to the community and it is appropriate that that contribution be formally acknowledged. During the year a number of Justices retired from Bench Duty on the basis of age. I wish to thank those Justices for their services and I trust that they found their periods of service personally rewarding. Finally, I wish to acknowledge and express my appreciation to my colleagues, the judicial and non-judicial officers of the Magistrates Court of Tasmania, for their continuing cooperation, dedication and professionalism.

AG Shott CHIEF MAGISTRATE Preface

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 3

Magistrates Court

Annual Report

Criminal and General Division Tasmanian Criminal & General Jurisdiction Statutes Children’s Division Youth Justice Division

Civil Division 2004

Civil Proceedings Administrative Appeals Division Relationships Criminal Residential Tenancies Proceedings

Minor Civil Claims Residential Tenancies , Civil Actions Tribunals Fees Practice Directions Mediation Ant-Discrimination Tribunal and Conciliation . Mining Tribunal Minor Civil Motor Accidents Tribunal Claims, legal advice Forms Circulars Coronial Division Criminal Proceedings Residential Tenancies , Civil Actions Fees Practice Directions Mediation 2004 -2005 and Conciliation . Minor Civil Claims , legal advice Forms Circulars Criminal Proceedings Civil Actions

Part 1

OVERVIEW magistrates court

The Magistrates Court

The Magistrates Court of Tasmania is a statutory body created as a Court of record by the Magistrates Court Act section 3A that comprises the Chief Magistrate, the Deputy Chief Magistrate and the Magistrates.

Statutory provisions invest Magistrates with jurisdiction to hear and determine an extremely broad range of legal causes. Various legal structures that have been created by numerous statutes to facilitate the hearing of such causes are defined collectively as “the lower Courts”.

The Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 3 provides that ‘lower Courts’ means –

a) the Magistrates Court; b) Courts of summary jurisdiction within the meaning of the Justices Act 1959; c) a tribunal under any Act - i. that is constituted by a magistrate; or ii. of which a magistrate is the chairperson;

Invariably, a Division of the Magistrates Court of Tasmania is properly constituted by one magistrate sitting alone in that Division. The Magistrates Court has jurisdiction throughout the State and provision is made for the Court to sit in Divisions created by statute.

To date, the following Divisions of the Magistrates Court have been created:

• Administrative Appeals Division; • Coronial Division; • Mining Division (known as “The Mining Tribunal”); • Civil Division; • Youth Justice Division; and • Children’s Division

Magistrates in Courts of Petty Sessions hear and determine simple offences, crimes triable summarily under State and Commonwealth legislation, breaches of duty, applications under various State and Commonwealth statutes, exercise a wide range of appellate and review functions. Magistrates also hear simple and indictable offences in the Youth Justice Division as well as exercising child protection and welfare responsibilities under various Acts.

Magistrates in the Civil Division hear and determine civil matters to a value of $20,000 or an unlimited amount with the consent of the parties. Matters up to a value of $5000 are considered Minor Civil Claims and undergo conciliation prior to proceeding to hearing. Magistrates also sit as Coroners to conduct inquests into sudden deaths, fires and explosions.

Magistrates also sit as chairpersons of various statutory tribunals, including the Anti- Discrimination Tribunal, the Motor Accidents Compensation Tribunal, the Mining Tribunal, and the Workplace Health & Safety Tribunal.

Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 5

Table 1 – Overview of Court Statistics

2003-04 2004-05 Details Number of Magistrates (permanent) 12 12 Number of Magistrates (temporary) .2 .5 Total Administrative staff 67 65.8 Total Criminal lodgements 69 120 64 431 Number of Youth Justice matters lodged 1 748 1 633 Number of Care and Protection orders applications 106 203 Total Civil lodgements 11 460 11 654 Number of Administrative Appeal lodgements 25 26 Total Coronial Deaths reported 617 630 Number of complaints referred to the Anti-Discrimination 43 40 Tribunal Number of Motor Accident Compensation Tribunal 96 68 lodgements % of Settled Mediation/Conciliation conferences 69% 61%

CRIMINAL & GENERAL DIVISION

Courts of summary jurisdiction The most frequent exercise of this jurisdiction under the Justices Act 1959 is that exercised by a magistrate sitting alone as a “Court of Petty Sessions”. It is intended to establish the Magistrates Court (Criminal and General Division) in 2006 under new legislation, which will repeal the Justices Act 1959.

Youth Justice Courts Magistrates constitute Youth Justice Courts throughout the State.

Justices of the Peace Justices of the Peace continue to provide excellent service to the Tasmanian Community.

Justices appointed by the Chief Magistrate, pursuant to section 23AB of the Justices Act 1959, are authorised to perform ‘Bench Duty’ and sit in Courts in each of the major centres.

Page 6

Bench duty involves sitting in after-hours Courts to deal with applications for bail, restraint and family violence orders. The proclamation in March 2005 of the Family Violence Act 2004 saw many more applications coming before justices in the after-hours Courts.

In addition, Justices of the Peace preside over minor traffic regulation offence courts and parking offence Courts and the taking of depositions in respect of indictable matters that are heard and determined in the Supreme Court.

Again this year the contribution to the operation of the Magistrates Court by those dedicated staff deserves high praise.

On behalf of the Magistrates Court, I wish to also acknowledge the Courts appreciation of Mr Leigh Lovegrove’s contribution, who earlier this year resigned from the role of coordinator and conductor of the Justice of the Peace Level 1 Course. Mr Lovegrove has been conducting this course in Hobart since its inception, the course being a prerequisite to appointment as a Justice of the Peace. We thank Mr Lovegrove for his dedication to this role and wish him a healthy and happy future.

Further acknowledgement must go to the two associations in Tasmania who continue the professional development of Justices’ of the Peace. The Honorary Justices’ Association of Tasmania Inc. (northern Tasmania) and the southern equivalent, the newly named Tasmanian Society of Justices of the Peace. The work of both these groups maintain the high professional standards of all Justices of the Peace.

CIVIL DIVISION

The Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act 1992 has been in operation since the 30th March 1998 and establishes the Civil Division of the Magistrates Court. All civil actions filed in the lower Court must be commenced in this jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction Claims not exceeding $20 000 may be heard in the Division. However, the Court has a jurisdiction unlimited as to amount if all parties consent. The Court exercises jurisdiction at law and in equity. Further, the Court has jurisdiction under other legislation, such as the Residential Tenancy Act 1997, and the Relationships Act 2003.

Pursuant to the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Rules 1998: “Proceedings in the Court are to be conducted –

• with the least possible delay; and • in a manner that ensures, as far as is practicable, that the parties are on an equal footing; and • in a manner that saves costs; and • in a manner that is proportionate to - i. the amount of any claim; and ii. the importance or complexity of the action; and iii. the financial positions of the parties.” Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 7

The Court assumes the responsibility for managing the litigation through the Court processes in a manner that accords with these precepts. The Court uses a single computerised database state-wide for civil case management purposes. The database is the ‘Civil Information Management System’ (CIMS).

TRIBUNALS

Relevant Tribunals as well as a list of appellate functions exercised by magistrates are listed in the chapter on Tribunals.

ADMINISTRATION

“The Chief Magistrate is responsible for ensuring the orderly and expeditious discharge of the business of the lower Courts…”: Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 15(6).

The Administrator of the Magistrates Court is the Court’s chief executive officer and a primary function of his role is that of providing administrative support to the Chief Magistrate and Magistrates. The Administrator is also accountable by statute to the Secretary, Department of Justice for the control and direction of the staff, budget, and asset management of the lower Courts.

The Court has continued to operate a Court Management Group (CMG) consisting of the Chief Magistrate, the Deputy Chief Magistrate, the Administrator of Courts, the Deputy Administrator of Courts, the Manager (N&NW), the Manager (Finance and Facilities), the managers of Devonport and Burnie registries, and the Manager (Civil Division).

The Court continues to encourage flexible working practices by its officers, a number of whom work part-time. All employees are able to use flex-time (subject to work demands) to accommodate personal appointments within normal working hours.

The Court’s organisation structure as at 30 June 2005, is set out in Appendix E.

Budget Expenditure 2004/2005 The Court acknowledges the valuable assistance provided by the Safe at Home Project Budget during implementation of the Family Violence Act 2004 in the reporting year. The supplementary funding enabled:

• Employment of a Project Officer; • Employment of Family Violence Case Management Officer; • Purchase of additional video conferencing equipment; • Publication of additional website information; • Preparation of a virtual tour of the Court via its website; • Additional security services to be made available state-wide for volatile Family Violence Court sittings.

Page 8

Maintenance of effective day-to-day Court operations Despite all the new initiatives that the Court is implementing (case management, CRIMES, new website, new Civil IT system) and a slight increase in workload (eg. total lodgments increased; Family Violence cases increased, Care & Protection caseload increased in volume and complexity), the Court has been able to maintain the daily core business of the Court (eg lodgments, listings, finalisations). Indeed, the Court has been able to improve on some KPI’s during this reporting period, e.g. timeliness of finalisation

That is the Court is achieving its primary objective of ensuring summary justice is delivered to the Tasmanian community in an efficient, timely, and accessible manner.

Security Services This year saw SSL Security Services Pty Ltd continue to provide security services to the Magistrates Court state-wide. The company provides security personnel, appointed by the Commissioner of Police as Ancillary Constables, to each major Court centre and to all country Courts. In addition security personnel attend all after-hours Courts.

With the introduction of the new Family Violence legislation bringing more disputing parties onto Court premises, there has been an increased need for security services.

Justice of the Peace Manual During the reporting year, the Court commenced the production of a Manual for Justices of the Peace.

This manual is designed to replace the ‘Blue Book’ that has for many years been the only reference available to Justices of the Peace in the operation of their role. Changes to legislation, and practice and procedures were such that rather than simply updating the ‘Blue Book’, a complete rewrite was considered necessary.

The Manual will encompass all aspects of the role of a Justice of the Peace from swearing oaths and affirmations, witnessing wills and issuing search warrants to undertaking bench duties.

Consultant Mary Rudge has been employed to write and design the new Manual. Ms Rudge is legally qualified and brings a wealth of experience to her role. The Manual will be used in future to augment the Level 1 and Level 3 Bench Justice Courses.

Acknowledgments This year saw the resignation of the District Registrar of the Civil Division Ms Sally Bridge. Ms Bridge had been with the Civil Division since 1983. The Court wishes to thank Ms Bridge for her fine contribution to the administration of justice in the Magistrates Court over 22 years.

The Court would also like to thank those organisations that attend the Court on a regular basis and assist clients of the Court or indeed the Court itself with reports. Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 9

Personnel from the Department of Health and Human Services, Forensic Mental Health Service are permanently stationed at the Magistrates Court in some regions to assist the Court in initial evaluation and often reports on the mental health of some defendants charged with alleged offences. The Court Support and Liaison Service provide daily assistance to persons attending Court as victims of family violence.

Volunteer services such as the Hobart Community Legal Service, Salvation Army Support Service and Friends@ Court are organisations that provide valuable assistance to persons attending Courts in each region. Particular mention should go to a new initiative commenced this year in conjunction with the Department of Health and Human Services, (Youth and Family Services Division) and Anglicare for a pilot study, known as the Young Offenders' Bail Options Project.

IT Systems and Technology This reporting period saw further developments in the Court’s IT infrastructure with the introduction of Digital Audio Recording. Previously all recordings were made on audio cassette and the storage of cassettes and maintenance of tape recorders was becoming a burden on the Court. All Court recordings are now made to a computer hard drive in the Court Room and can be transferred to servers for short-term storage and disk for long-term storage. A Magistrate can now play back a case in his/her chambers on a desktop computer. The introduction of digital audio recording was achieved in a joint project with the Supreme Court.

Further enhancements to the Criminal Registry Information and Enquiry System (CRIMES) in the reporting period have been centred in the area of data integrity, and preparation for delivery of Court outcomes data by secure Web services to authorised Government Agencies.

Emphasis this year has been on improving the validation of data and where possible building automated validation into some aspects of the system in order to reduce the administrative burden on operational staff.

Major Outcomes - Report

Court Website Issue: Redesign the structure, navigation, and content management software of the Court’s external and internal websites and review the content to ensure currency.

Report: During the year the Department of Justice adopted the Mysource Matrix content management software developed by Squiz Pty Ltd. In view of the intrinsic advantages provided by content management systems the Court decided to transfer its website material into the same environment.

In recognition of their constitutional position as the third arm of Government the Courts developed identifiable designs that clearly showed interrelationship while maintaining an identifiable difference from the Executive. This was done without detracting from the functionality necessary to maximise usability of the site for persons moving through the various Tasmanian Government websites.

Page 10

Since the Supreme Court and Magistrates Court have very similar stakeholder groups it was decided to create a significant Courts Portal at www.courts.tas.gov.au, through which access could be gained to either the Supreme Court website at www.supremecourt.tas.gov.au or the Magistrates Court website at www.magistratescourt.tas.gov.au. For the same reason it was decided to establish a menu structure that was as similar as possible between the sites while at the same time recognising the differences in jurisdictions.

The process of redesign involved consultation with Court users and staff groups and this identified some additional information needs that have been included in the site.

During the redevelopment process the current material was subjected to minor review and it is intended that processes will be put in place that will result in all material being subjected to a regular review.

Digital Audio Recording Issue: In conjunction with the Supreme Court, complete the tendering and installation of digital audio-recording systems in all courtrooms in all registries.

Report: After an exhaustive selection process the Courts selected Lanier Voice of Lavington, New South Wales, to provide the required audio recording systems. Installation of the new equipment began in January 2005 and was operational state-wide by the end of February.

This allowed the Court to move into the digital age and to no longer have to rely upon an ageing fleet of conventional analogue tape recorders. It has also freed up a substantial amount of physical storage space that was being utilised for retaining copies of recordings for the three-month period required under the Justice Rules 2003.

The main features of the selected digital audio recording system are that it: Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 11

• Intelligently manages audio with provision for audio amplification and distribution; • Provides management of files for transcription, archiving or distribution; • Provides pre-set and dynamic annotations to produce minute orders; • Allows linking of files to the digital recording; • Provides easy case review with hyper linked annotation contents; • Creates recording files which can be viewed and reviewed on any Windows PC; • Allows data exchange between recording and case management systems; • Allows instant review of proceeding whilst recording continues; • Allows microphone identification to enhance transcription accuracy; • Allows for future integration of switching video to produce complete audio/ video record; • Allows for connection to video conference input for remote witness recording; • Allows for streaming of Audio and Video to the internet if required in the future.

In the courtroom environment these features:

• Enable magistrates and other appropriate staff to readily access recordings from any part of the Court registry via the computer network; • Allow Court clerks to maintain an accurate index of proceedings (minute book) to readily locate significant points in hearings such as, evidence by witnesses, cross examination, exhibits and sentencing statements by Magistrates; • Enable copies of recordings of proceedings to be readily provided to interested parties on computer readable CDs or DVDs; • Provide a better quality recording through improved microphone technology and Court clerk control over record levels; • Ensure more complete transcripts through a reduction in the number of instances where a witness or solicitor may be inaudible; • Enable future integration of the system with the Court’s case management system (CRIMES) which will provide further efficiencies in the operation of the Court.

The Elderly and The Court Issue: Implementation of recommendations arising from The Elderly & The Courts project commissioned by the Magistrates Court of Tasmania and funded by the Law Foundation of Tasmania

Report: There were twelve recommendations contained in the Report Access to Justice – Seniors and the Courts prepared by Sue Field, from the University of Western Sydney and of these ten required specific attention by the Magistrates Court. Each of the recommendations and the progress on these are set out below:

Recommendation One: Review of Court Documents A review of the information required on current Court documents and amendments where necessary, will provide an expanded data base and information on the specific needs of older persons prior to them attending Court. The documents should also readily identify whether the client requires the assistance of an interpreter/translator.

Progress: Forms and other documents are available on the Court’s website which has been redesigned and transferred to a content management system. These will be reviewed, taking into consideration the needs of the elderly and others, as part of the ongoing review of the website material.

Recommendation Two: Staff Training and Court Volunteers Staff have identified the need for specialised training to assist them recognise the needs of older persons when attending Court. A pro-active approach to addressing needs will reduce some of the concerns and frustrations experienced by both staff and clients.

Page 12

Selection and training of suitable persons to act as Court volunteers and/or expansion of the Salvation Army Prison Chaplaincy to become an integral part of the Court process would provide a reassuring presence and reduce some of the stressors associated with a Court attendance.

Qualified interpreters/translators should be available when required, as previously identified.

Progress: The Court has added to its Court Support program with additional volunteers in Hobart (Friends@ Court) and in Launceston (Anglicare and the Salvation Army). With respect to interpreters, the Court has continued to ensure that individuals in need of assistance are readily able to access the services of interpreters at no cost to themselves.

Recommendation Three: Appointment of a Contact Officer The appointment of a designated person in each of the Courts to act as a contact/resource person would provide a focal point not only for the staff and Court “officials” but for the general public as well.

Progress: The Court’s Ethnic Liaison Officers have been appointed to undertake this role.

Recommendation Four: Amendments to Signage Increase the size of the font, currently used for Court Lists, to a size 14/16. This will enable all persons attending Court to see more clearly the essential information for a Court appearance.

Progress: A review of signage revealed that the only area in need of change was the font size on the ‘Daily Court Lists’ that are displayed on the Notice Boards in the Court’s foyers. The font size has been increased to 14 point on all lists displayed in the public waiting areas.

Recommendation Five: Discreet Courts Certain Court times can be extremely busy and Court delays are often unavoidable in such situations. Furthermore, in some situations the matter may attract public/media interest, increasing the levels of stress experienced by some older persons.

The provision of a regular dedicated Court, during a quieter period, would not increase the workload and provide an environment more conducive to that experienced by older persons. Such a Court would also be in line with other dedicated Courts outlined earlier.

Progress: While this is a desirable option the Court’s facilities are heavily utilised and it is not possible to provide an opportunity for further dedicated Courts to be held in quieter periods.

Recommendation Six: Production of an Information Video The production of a video providing an overview of the physical layout of the Courts; the role of the personnel; and the processes that occur within Court hearings. The video would be readily available from the Courts, and relevant community/advocacy groups. The video would assist in de-mystifying the Courts for the client, and reduce Court expenditure as a result of decreased time spent in responding to some of the more elementary queries.

Progress: The Court has available a general information video that covers the operation of a number of types of Courts. This will be complimented by a web based virtual tour of the Court which is being developed in response to needs identified from the Government’s ‘Safe at Home’ project.

Recommendation Seven: Production of brochures Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 13

Production of brochures outlining the Court process and providing a ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ and responses section. Such brochures would be free and handed to clients required to appear in Court. They should also be easily obtainable from organisations such as Centrelink, welfare agencies, doctor surgeries, legal aid offices, offices of legal practitioners and senior citizens groups/clubs and organisations.

Progress: The Court’s new website is being reviewed and updated in a manner that will enable information brochures and Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ’s) to be easily printed from the same core material.

Recommendation Eight: Expansion of the Court website While the small percentage of older persons who access the internet is well recognized, this does not preclude family/friends accessing the information for an older person. The expanded website should include Frequently Asked Questions and Answers.

Progress: An extensive glossary has been added to the new website, and this will be extended to include a section on frequently asked questions.

Recommendation Nine: Audio aids Difficulties associated with hearing were a common theme throughout the research. The installation of Hearing loops/audio aids within all the Court precincts should be high priority.

Progress: The Courts in Hobart and Devonport were built with audio loops in place which transmit to appropriately equipped hearing aids. As part of the Digital Audio recording project in 2005, the Courts in Launceston and Burnie were provided with headphones (available on request) that connect to the Court recording system via infrared transmitters.

Recommendation Ten: Financial assistance Although, on demonstration of a need, there is provision for assistance in respect of filing fees this assistance could be highlighted through the designated Court contact person.

The provision of a pro bono legal service would assist older persons in the completion and filing of documents and initial representation.

Progress: The Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act 1998 was amended in 2004, enabling filing fees to be waived, reduced, or deferred for impecunious parties, including eligible elderly persons. The matter of pro bono legal assistance is the responsibility of the legal profession.

Recommendation Eleven: Community Education It is apparent that there is a need, and demand, for further community education not only in respect to access to the Courts, but access to justice generally. A state-wide tour, visiting local councils should be organised to provide this information. The program should meet the specific needs not only of metropolitan residents but particularly those in more rural communities.

Progress: The Court has continued to make Officers of the Court available to community groups to increase the level of awareness on issues involving the Court’s role in the State’s justice system.

Recommendation Twelve: Further Research It is recognised that not all older persons belong to community organisations. A state-wide series of forums should be conducted in community halls to provide people with the opportunity of further expressing their concerns about accessing the Courts. The use of shire/community halls may well encourage attendance among those persons who do not belong to community groups. This further research could be incorporated into the tour recommended above.

Page 14

Progress: The pursuit of this project recommendation is dependant upon the availability of the necessary funding and a researcher with an appropriate skills set. At this point in time the Court does have access to the required resources.

Civil Registry Management System Issue: The Magistrates Court, in conjunction with the Supreme Court, will consider the consultant’s scoping study recommendations for the development of a new information management system for civil matters filed in both Courts.

Report: Progress has been made in relation to advancing this project. The Magistrates Court would like to acknowledge the Supreme Court and the Department of Treasury and Finance for their co-operation in allocating a proportion of increased filing fees to be retained for the ongoing development of the Civil Registry Management System in both the Supreme and Magistrates Court.

Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 15

DIVISIONS of the COURT

Criminal & General Division

The criminal jurisdiction exercised pursuant to the Justices Act 1959 comprises a major aspect (approx 75%) of the work of the Court. The principal Courts under this legislation are Courts of Petty Sessions which are usually constituted by a magistrate sitting alone.

Jurisdiction A Court of Petty Sessions may hear and determine all summary or simple offences as well as certain offences which would otherwise be indictable. Legislation administered in Courts of Petty Sessions is listed in Appendix A.

Usually, indictable offences must be heard and determined in the Supreme Court. However, in certain cases, based upon the amount involved or the election of the defendant, certain indictable offences must and, in some cases, may be heard and determined in a Court of Petty Sessions.

In addition, magistrates hear and determine a broad range of offences against the laws of the Commonwealth.

Court demands The large volume of matters dealt with in this Division (approx. 60,000) requires a constant effort be made to coordinate the resources needed for Courts to function. For example, on any given day it is necessary to ensure that the following are available at the right place and time:

• magistrate or bench justice; • Court clerk; • prosecutor; • defendant (whether in custody or not); • defendant’s solicitor; • youth justice worker, probation officer, mental health liaison officer or interpreter (as required); • court room; • security guard(s); • the Court files; and • any specialist equipment required for the presentation of evidence e.g. equipment for digital recording, video conferencing, audio conferencing, video playback

This highlights the need for the operations of this Division to be kept under constant review both at the administrative and judicial levels to ensure that Courts function as efficiently and effectively as possible.

Page 16

Criminal Case Management • The Criminal Registry Information Management and Enquiry System (CRIMES) has now been in operation since March 2002 and continues to be improved for greater Court and stakeholder efficiency. • Enhancements in this reporting period saw the redevelopment of the ROAS (Restraint Order Application System) into CELS (Court Electronic Lodgement System). As well as receiving Restraint Order applications from Police Officers as ROAS did, CELS can now receive Family Violence applications for direct loading into CRIMES and listing before a court. CELS also accepts and stores a copy of each Police Family Violence Order issued by Police. Direct access to copies of these orders improves the Court’s efficiency in the event that applications to vary or revoke a Police Family Violence Order is received by the Court. • CRIMES is now available on desktop computers in each courtroom around the State for Magistrates and Court Clerks. This assists greatly in the day-to-day operation of the Court and in particular access to the diary module allows for more efficient re-listing, and consolidation, of charges. • Magistrates continue to manage their caseloads under the “Personal Diary System” (also known as the Individual Docket System in other jurisdictions). Under the Personal Diary System, each Magistrate retains carriage of each case that he or she first receives in their rostered intake (or ‘lock-up’) court sessions. This system encourages an effective individual case management approach to ensure a prompt resolution of cases (either by trial, plea of guilty, or withdrawal) consistent with also ensuring each Defendant’s right to a fair trial. • Work continues on the Supreme Court implementation of CRIMES with the appointment of Chris Nason, at the Launceston Supreme Court to oversee the initial testing and identification of changes to CRIMES for application as the Supreme Court criminal registry data management system. When implemented in the Supreme Court, CRIMES will facilitate more efficient file transfer of indictable matters following committal for trial or sentence; and will also enable the electronic and speedy transfer to the Magistrates Court of the results of any

appeals against Magistrates’ or Bench Justices decisions refusing bail. • Work has also commenced to enhance CRIMES to interface with the Fines Enforcement System (“FIND”), which has been developed as part of the Monetary Penalty Enforcement Project (“MPEP”). FIND will accept data on penalties imposed by the Court and recorded in CRIMES; and will also transfer data relevant to warrants issued by the Fines Enforcement Unit.

Video-Link • The Magistrates Court continues to take full advantage of video-conferencing technology and on a weekly basis holds video-link remand hearings between all

four Court centres and Risdon Prison, Remand Centres, and the Ashley Youth Criminal & General Detention Centre. The safety, efficiency and transport cost savings are – considerable for both the Court and Corrective Services, and ultimately also ensure public safety.

• The purchase of an additional roll-about video conferencing unit for each registry from Safe@Home funding now means that any courtroom can quickly be converted to a video link courtroom. This has been a considerable advantage for victims of family violence (and in particular child witnesses) who can now give their evidence from a remote site or a special witness room within the Court building, enhancing their safety and comfort.

Divisions of the Court Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 17

• An initiative undertaken this year resulting from the series of Youth Justice Workshops convened by the Magistrates Court in 2004 has been the provision and availability of the Court’s video conferencing facilities without charge to practitioners. Solicitors can now take instructions from their clients in custody at Risdon Prison, Remand Centres, or Ashley Youth Detention Centre via the Court’s video link facilities. This has reduced travel costs to solicitors and increased the timely provision of information back to the Court, thereby reducing adjournment times.

Appointment of Temporary Magistrates and Additional Coroners Again it is a pleasure to report the appointment of temporary Magistrate, Mrs Melanie Bartlett in May 2005. The previously reported appointment of Mrs Merrin MacKay continued into this reporting period with Mrs MacKay adjudicating civil proceedings in Courts around the State.

Mrs Bartlett was appointed for a period of six months commencing on 23rd May 2005. Mrs Bartlett has provided relief Magistrate support to all registries around the State during periods of leave. This appointment allows the Magistrates Court to maintain its case finalisation rate despite the absence of Magistrates while on leave

Full Time Appointment of Magistrate Olivia McTaggart Mrs Olivia McTaggart was sworn in as a full time Magistrate on the 10th June 2005. This was a memorable day for the Tasmanian Magistrates Court. Mrs Mc Taggart is located in Hobart.

As reported in last year’s Annual Report Mrs McTaggart had served a period as a temporary Magistrate, completing a first term in October 2004. Mrs Mc Taggart was re-appointed in February 2005 for a second term when the announcement that Magistrate Shan Tennent was to be appointed as the first female judge in the Supreme Court of Tasmania.

Eventually Mrs McTaggart was the successful nominee to replace Mrs Tennent as a full time Magistrate and now undertakes duties across all jurisdictions of the Court.

Electronic Bench-books Issue: Continue the development of ‘electronic courts’ by undertaking a scoping study for the development of an electronic bench-book and related infrastructure to enable access to legal information resources from the Bench.

Report: Development of electronic courtrooms was advanced during the reporting year by installation of additional IT infrastructure, such as personal Computers (PC’s) for Court Clerks and digital audio recording equipment. Work is in progress to collate local electronic resource materials by Magistrates.

Youth Justice Division

The Youth Justice Act 1997 created the Youth Justice Division of the Magistrates Court and applies to persons under the age of 18 years at the time of the alleged offence. In addition to regulating Court processes, the legislation makes transparent and accountable provision for diversionary practices and conferencing, the purpose of which is to encourage youths to take personal responsibility for their actions.

Page 18

A total of 1633 criminal matters were lodged in the Youth Justice Division in the reporting year. Of the total criminal matters, 21 Community Conferences were ordered by the Court.

The legislation effected significant changes to the philosophy that underpins the processes by which youths who are alleged to have committed offences have their charges determined by the criminal justice system.

Specifically, the ‘welfare model’ was illustrated by section 4 of the (now repealed) Child Welfare Act 1961 which provided,

‘The powers and authorities conferred on any Court or any person by this Act shall be exercised so as to secure that, as far as is practicable and expedient, each child suspected of having committed, charged with, or found guilty of an offence shall be treated, not as a criminal, but as a child who is, or may have been, misdirected or misguided, and that the care, custody, and discipline of each ward of the State shall approximate as nearly as may be to that which should be given to it by its parents.’

However, the Youth Justice Act effects a significant change in that it incorporates the ‘justice model’.

Very broadly, that model seeks to secure to youths who are alleged to have committed offences the same entitlements as adults who are similarly placed.

In addition, the protection of the community and the enhancement of the rights of victims of offending behaviour are prominent aspects of the legislation.

Importantly, the Youth Justice Act seeks to encourage youths to take personal responsibility for their actions.

The legislation significantly extends the sentencing options available to the Court in order to encourage acceptance of that responsibility and otherwise to achieve the purposes of the Act.

The 2004-2005 reporting year saw a high usage of the Court’s Video-conferencing facilities for youths held on remand at the Ashley Detention Centre. A total of 224 videoconferences were conducted to Ashley Detention Centre during the reporting year. The use of these facilities ensure the safety of the offender, detention centre staff and the general public and there is also a cost-saving factor for the Department of Health and Human Services.

Criminal & General In previous periods the Court ran a series of workshops, one in each Registry, and brought – together Tasmania Police, Youth Justice, the legal profession, the Legal Aid Commission and others to try to reduce the number of young persons being held on remand at Ashley and the duration of their remand periods. A number of systemic problems were identified during these workshops and the following pilot program has been initiated.

• Anglicare has received funding to pilot an eight month project aimed at providing alternative accommodation for young people, 13-17 years old who would otherwise be remanded in custody. The ‘Bail Options Project’ is being trialed in Launceston and involves a combination of using selected and supervised accommodation coupled with intensive supervision by trained Anglicare officers.

Divisions of the Court Overview

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 19

• The focus for the project is an early intervention model, in that the resources will be directed at young people who in the main, have been charged with a first time offence and who will be enabled through support and the development and implementation of appropriate strategies to have the capacity to live free of offending behaviours. The intake for eligible persons will be from those youths who are remanded to Ashley from out of hours Courts and Community Youth Justice.

• In the case of a referral from the Ashley Youth Detention Centre, Ashley will contact the Bail Options Project officers to assess the suitability of the youth for the project. The assessment is unlikely to be able to be performed during the duration of an out of hour’s Court. If the assessment is unable to be completed on the day the matter is before the Court the matter will be adjourned for a day or two, so all options can be examined and a more detailed report can be furnished to the Court. Once the assessment has occurred the bail Option Project Officers will advise the Court of the possible options.

• It is envisaged that the conditions of bail will detail all of the reporting and any curfew conditions to ensure that the youth is aware of his/her conditions and expectation of the Court. This will also assist the Anglicare officer to ensure that the youth attends school, adheres to any curfew etc. The Anglicare officers will be ensuring that the conditions of bail are adhered to, and will be advising Police of any breaches that occur.

It is envisaged that the project will assist both the Court and the youth by ensuring that these mattes are dealt with in an appropriate time frame.

Children’s Division

The Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act 1997 commenced on 1 July 2000. The Act repealed the Child Protection Act 1974 and established new provisions for securing the welfare of children who are considered to be ‘at risk’ (section 4).

On the same day, the Magistrates Court (Children's Division) Act 1998 commenced. That Act created the Magistrates Court (Children’s Division) (section 4) and invested the Court with jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising from and under the Children, Young Persons and the Families Act 1997 and the jurisdiction conferred by the Adoption Act 1988 (section 6).

Orders that may be made by the Court under the Children, Young Persons and Their Families Act include assessment orders (section 22), care and protection orders (section 42) – see Appendix B, Table 15 - and restraint orders under Part XA of the Justices Act 1959 (section 23).

Warrants for the protection and assessment of young people at risk is a major use of the Duty Magistrate Scheme. Under this Scheme magistrates with the administrative support of senior Court officers are available after hours to consider applications for warrants to ensure that children at risk are provided with appropriate and expeditious protection where this is regarded as necessary.

Page 20

The thrust of the Act is to address the problems of children at risk by means of education, co-operation, and broader community and family involvement. Reference to the Court is a last resort.

The implementation of the Family Violence Legislation in March 2005 has had a significant impact on the number of applications brought before the Court for the assessment and protection of young people. The number of applications per year has almost doubled, from 106 to 203 in the reporting year.

Major Outcomes - Report In last year’s Annul Report a number of major issues were identified by the Court Management Group as having the capacity to impact upon the Courts performance during the following year. A review of progress made during the reporting year, and the related outcomes are detailed below.

Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES) IT System Issue: Complete the development and implementation of Stage 1 of the CRIMES IT case management system for the Courts criminal jurisdiction, including refined reporting for data extraction and management reporting, assisting implementation in the Supreme Court and improving access to case information by authorised Government Agency stakeholders.

Report: Continued development of CRIMES throughout the reporting year has seen the system updated for the introduction of the Family Violence Act 2004.

• Modification of the recently completed Restraint Order Application System (ROAS) and subsequent rename to Court Electronic Lodgement System (CELS) to also accept applications for Family Violence Orders and lodgement as a record of Police Family Violence Orders; • Introduction of Family Violence sessions into the Court calendar; • Creation of templates for all Family Violence related orders; • Uptake, display and return to Police of a Family Violence flag on relevant criminal matters filed with the Court.

Criminal & General Division legislation Issue: Complete the development of the policies and procedures to be embodied in the Court’s criminal jurisdiction legislation including:

• develop the proposed Magistrates Court (Criminal & General Division) Act to replace the Justices Act 1959; • promulgate Magistrates Court (Criminal & General Division) Rules to replace the Justices Rules 1976.

Report: This year has seen the completion and circulation to Magistrates of the consultation draft of the Criminal and General Division legislation. The legislation will be further enhanced by the contribution of Magistrates and senior Court staff before wider circulation to all stakeholders.

A comprehensive process of consultation with stakeholders will then be undertaken and in the coming period workshops to explain the changes, train operational staff, amend Court business rules and enhance systems to prepare for proclamation. Divisions of the Court - Civil

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 21

Development of modern fine enforcement legislation Report: The Magistrates Court has, during the reporting year, continued to support and assist the Fines Enforcement Unit of the Department of Justice in its Monetary Penalty Enforcement Project (MPEP). This project amongst other things requires enhancement to data systems in the Department of Justice, Department of Police and Public Safety, the Court, and the Department of Infrastructure, Energy & Resources (Motor Registry), in readiness for legislative changes to the collection and enforcement of monetary penalties imposed by the Court.

The introduction of MPEP in late 2006 will have a significant impact on the work of the Court in that a large proportion (60%) of our minor criminal caseload (traffic and parking regulation offence Courts) will no longer require a Court appearance, and that there will be a significant drop in the number of lodgements. With the removal of this "distorting" proportion factor, there will be a flow-on effect to other KPIs in future reporting years: such as timeliness of finalisations, and cost per case.

The use of XML Schemas in this development will assist the Magistrates Court well into the future with the ‘structured’ transfer of data between stakeholders and the use of ‘web services’ for that transfer.

Safe at Home (Family Violence legislation) Report: In March 2005 the proclamation of the Family Violence Act 2004 completed one period of intense activity for the Magistrates Court and marked the commencement of another.

Project Officer, Pip Shirley, funded by Safe at Home, commenced her role at the Magistrates Court in September 2004 to prepare the Court for the introduction of this important legislation.

A Project Steering Committee was established comprising:

• Chief Magistrate • Deputy Chief Magistrate • Administrator and Deputy Administrator of Courts • Team Leader Criminal and General Division and Manager Civil Division. • Safe at Home Project Officer.

The committee was tasked with overseeing all policy and resource decisions associated with the introduction of the family violence legislation.

The cross-agency approach required extensive consultation with divisions of the Department of Justice, Department of Police and Public Safety and Department of Health and Human Services.

Tasks included: • Examining the draft legislation and providing comments; • Preparation of rules of Court and accompanying forms; • Development of operational protocols between divisions of the Department of Justice and other agencies; • Creation of dedicated Family Violence Court sessions in each region around the state; • Liaison with, in Court buildings, provision of accommodation to Victim Support Services and the Family Violence Offender Intervention Program; • Establishing the position of a Family Violence Case Management Officer;

Page 22

• Data system (CRIMES) upgrade and creation of CELS (Court Electronic Lodgement System) for the receipt of applications for Family Violence Orders by Police and storage of Police Family Violence Orders, by electronic means; • Training of Justices of the Peace and operational staff within the Magistrates Court; • The creation of a web based virtual tour of the Magistrates Court is currently in pre- production; • Provision of additional audiovisual equipment in each Court Registry.

The Court acknowledges the exceptional work of Pip Shirley the Project Officer for the introduction of Safe at Home in the Magistrates Court. The ongoing monitoring and evaluation of the Courts provision of service to persons involved in family violence is a standing agenda item at Court Management Group meetings.

Divisions of the Court - Civil

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 23

CIVIL DIVISION

The Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act 1992 commenced on 30 March 1998 and established the Civil Division of the Magistrates Court of Tasmania. All civil actions filed in the lower Court must be commenced in this jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction Claims not exceeding $20 000 may be heard in the Civil Division. However, the Court has a jurisdiction unlimited as to amount if all parties consent. The Court exercises jurisdiction at law and in equity.

Further, the Court has jurisdiction under other legislation, such as the Residential Tenancy Act 1997, the De Facto Relationships Act and the Relationships Act 2003. Refer Appendix B, Figure 1.

Practice and procedure The practice and procedure of the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) is regulated by the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Rules 1998 which are made by the Magistrates Rules Committee established under s.15AC of the Magistrates Court Act 1987.

The case management philosophy that underlies the practice and procedure of the Court is set out in the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Rules rule 4 which provides,

“Proceedings in the Court are to be conducted - • with the least possible delay; and • in a manner that ensures, as far as is practicable, that the parties are on an equal footing; and • in a manner that saves costs; and • in a manner that is proportionate to - - the amount of any claim; and - the importance or complexity of the action; and - the financial positions of the parties.”

The Court assumes the responsibility for managing the litigation through the Court processes in a manner that accords with these precepts.

The Rules make provision for Directions Hearings and Conciliation Conferences.

The Court uses a single computerised database state-wide for civil case management purposes. The database is the ‘Civil Information Management System’ (CIMS).

Page 24

Conciliation Services An important component of the civil case management process is conciliation. The success rate of conciliation during the reporting year was approximately 61%. This result is slightly down on the previous period (70%). The Court expresses its appreciation of the highly skilled and experienced consultant conciliators (Mr Geoff Pickard, Stephen Wicks and Ms Tonia Kohl) and trained conciliators on the Court’s staff.

Minor Civil Claims The Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act 1999 also establishes the jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court in relation to minor civil claims.

In October 2003, the Small Claims Division of the Court was merged into the Civil Division upon commencement of the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Amendment Act 2003. The Magistrates Court (Small Claims Division) Act 1989 was repealed and small claims are now known as minor civil claims.

A minor civil claim is defined in the Act and Magistrates Court (Civil Division) (Minor Civil Claims) Regulations 2003 as:

• a claim or counterclaim for damages, or for the payment of money, if the amount claimed does not exceed $5 000 or any other amount as may be prescribed for the purpose of this definition; or • proceedings for damages under the Residential Tenancy Act 1997, if the amount claimed does not exceed $5 000; or • proceedings under any provision of the Residential Tenancy Act that confers a right to apply to, or appeal to, the Court; or • proceedings under any provision of the Irrigation Clauses Act 1973 that confers a right to apply to, or appeal to, the Court; • proceedings under any provision of the Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992 that confers a right to apply to, or appeal to, the Court.

Practice and procedure Procedures utilised in minor civil claims are as informal and as expeditious as a proper consideration of the issues permits, and are prescribed in Part 5 of the Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act. Usually, parties present their own cases.

Unless all parties consent, legal practitioners are generally not permitted to represent parties.

The primary function of the Magistrate is to attempt to bring the parties to a settlement acceptable to all the parties. However, if that appears to be impossible, the Magistrate hears and determines the claim.

A Magistrate may not award costs against a party unless the expenses or compensation relate to a proceeding that is frivolous or vexatious.

Divisions of the Court - Civil

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 25

Administrative Appeals Division (AAD)

The Magistrates Court (Administrative Appeals Division) Act 2001 standardises appeal procedures in approximately 50 separate Acts and Regulations that in some way confer a right of review or appeal to a Magistrate with regard to administrative decisions (or the refusal to make a decision). There is now a consistent procedure by which an “interested party” can obtain a review by a Magistrate of an administrative decision with which they are aggrieved.

Some examples of administrative decisions in respect of which an appeal lies to a Magistrate are:

• Appeals against refusals to grant a firearm licence pursuant to Part 10 of the Firearms Act 1996; • Appeals against refusal to renew teachers’ registration, pursuant to s.29 of the Teachers Registration Act 2000; • Appeals against a Notice of Contribution to the construction costs of a new street pursuant to the Local Government Act 1993; • Appeals against decisions relating to the issue or refusal to issue a Dog Kennel licences pursuant to Section 59 of the Dog Control Act 2000; and • Appeals against assessment of land value pursuant to Section 27 of the Crown Lands (Shack Sites) Act 1997.

For a complete list of Acts containing rights of appeal to this Division, see the Schedule to the Magistrates Court (Administrative Appeals Division) (Consequential Amendments) Act 2001.

Applications can be made under the Magistrates Court (Administrative Appeals Division) Act for the following remedies:

• Review (Appeal) of a reviewable decision - Section 17; • Declaration of entitlement to reasons for decision - Section 15(1); • Declaration that the person has not received reasons within reasonable time – Section 15(2); • Declaration that the person has not received reasons within time specified - Section 16(1); • Order to provide adequate statement of reasons received - Section 16(2); • Extension of time to apply for review of decision - Section 20; • Application to stay effect of decision - Section 23(3).

Details of the Applications received during the reporting year and their outcomes can be found in Appendix B Tables 4 and 5.

Residential Tenancies

In the exercise of jurisdiction conferred under this legislation, the Magistrates Court hears and determines:

• Applications for vacant possession;

Page 26

• Applications for declarations that residential rented premises have been abandoned; • Claims for compensation or repairs to damaged property; and • Appeals against determinations of the Residential Tenancy Commissioner in relation to the return of security deposits.

The Court may order the following remedies:

• vacant possession; • damages for destroyed or damaged property; and • uphold or dismiss appeals from the Residential Tenancy Commissioner.

Practice and procedure The Court provides streamlined proceedings for various forms of relief under the Residential Tenancy Act as it recognises the critical nature of some actions. This approach has been in place since the commencement of the Act.

The streamlined procedures include:

• listing urgent applications for vacant possession before a magistrate sitting in the Civil Division to ensure a simple and speedy determination of the matter; • training of all staff in the Civil Division as to the appropriate procedures to enable them to advise parties who, frequently, are unrepresented, on tenancy matters; • drafting a sample Notice to Vacate which complies with the Act for use by unrepresented parties; and • separate Claim Forms for different types of relief sought under the Act which require parties to provide certain copy documents to the Court.

Relationships Act

Introduction The Relationships Act 2003 which commenced 1 January 2004 confers jurisdiction upon the Magistrates Court. Applications under this Act are managed in the Court’s Civil

Division.

Jurisdiction In the exercise of jurisdiction conferred under this legislation, the Magistrates Court hears and determines:

• applications for orders for the adjustment of interests with respect to the property of either or both of the persons in the relationships up to a value of $20,000 (or unlimited if all parties consent); • applications for the granting of or variation of maintenance of children of a relationship; • applications for the granting of or variation of maintenance of one of the partners of a relationship; and • applications for variation of terms of cohabitation and separation agreements.

The Rules that apply to the practice and procedure of the Court in this jurisdiction are set out in the Chief Magistrate's Practice Direction 1 of 2004. Divisions of the Court - Civil

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 27

Fifty three applications have been received under this Act since commencement of which 90% have been determined by consent and have been filed to comply with s57 of the Duties Act 2001 which exempts duty on a transfer, or agreement for the sale or transfer of relationship property. Details of the Applications received and their outcomes can be found in Appendix B, Table 8.

Page 28

Tribunals

The Magistrates Court Act 1987 s.3 provides that the “lower Courts” includes:

“ (c) a tribunal under any Act – (i) that is constituted by a Magistrate; or (ii) of which a Magistrate is the chairperson.”

Anti-Discrimination Tribunal

Background The Anti-Discrimination Tribunal was created by the Anti-Discrimination 1998 which commenced on the 10th December 1999. This is the fifth report relating to the Anti- Discrimination Tribunal and this report covers the fourth full financial year of the Tribunal’s operation.

Membership of the Tribunal Panel The Chairperson and the panel members carry out their responsibilities part-time.

The membership of the Tribunal is as follows:

Hobart Launceston Ms Helen Wood (Chairperson) Mr Steven Bishop

Professor Margaret Otlowski Mr Michael Brett

Ms Antonia Kohl

Ms Anita Smith North-West Coast

Mr Glenn Hay Ms Melanie Bartlett

Ms Vicki Rutter

Ms Catherine Rheinberger

Staff / resources There is one full-time Administrative Support Officer working with the Tribunal. Secretarial support for the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal is provided by the Magistrates' Secretary. In addition, the Manager of the Civil Division has also continued to provide support. Staff working for the Tribunal in 2004/2005 were:

Evelyn Robertson Manager, Civil Division – part time

Colleen McCullagh Senior Clerk – full time

Rena Venetsanakos Magistrates Secretary – part time Divisions of the Court - Tribunals

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 29

Location of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal The Office of the Tribunal is located at the Magistrates Court, Hobart, and the address and contact details are as follows:

Office of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal 23 - 27 Liverpool Street HOBART TAS 7000 Telephone: (03) 6233 2020/6233 3620 Facsimile: (03) 6233 5355 Email: [email protected]

Tribunal sittings are arranged in other centres as required such as Burnie, Launceston

and Devonport.

Jurisdiction of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal The Tribunal can hear complaints of discrimination on any of the following grounds: • race; • family responsibilities; • age; • disability; • sexual orientation; • industrial activity; • lawful sexual activity; • political belief or affiliation; • gender; • political activity; • marital status; • religious belief or affiliation; • pregnancy; • religious activity; • breastfeeding; • irrelevant criminal record; • parental status; • irrelevant medical record; and • association with a person who has, or is believed to have, any of these attributes.

Further, the Tribunal hears complaints of sexual harassment and also prohibited conduct (which includes offensive or humiliating conduct: see s17) based on gender, marital status, pregnancy, breast feeding, parental status and family responsibilities. Other grounds of complaint are victimisation relating to complaints or proceedings under the Act and inciting hatred on the ground of race, disability, sexual orientation, lawful sexual activity, religious belief or affiliation or religious activity.

The areas of activity which are covered by the Act concern:

• employment; • membership and activities of clubs; • education and training; • accommodation; • provision of facilities, goods and services; • administration of any law of the State and any State program on the basis of some of the grounds specified above; • awards, enterprise agreements and industrial agreements on some of the grounds set out above.

(Complaints involving inciting hatred are not limited to these areas of activity).

Page 30

Statutory functions The main statutory functions of the Anti-Discrimination Tribunal are:

a) Conducting Inquiries in relation to complaints referred to the Tribunal. b) Review of complaints rejected or dismissed by the Commissioner. c) Consideration of reports submitted by the Commissioner to the Tribunal in relation to a person failing to provide information or produce documentation during the course of an investigation.

Workload of the Tribunal At the commencement of the reporting year there were 90 current files which had been previously referred to the Tribunal and which were unfinalised. This is comparable with previous reporting periods.

During the reporting year, a total of 72 matters were received by the Tribunal. In the previous reporting year 84 matters were received. A breakdown of all matters received and finalised in the reporting year are set out in Table 11, and the regional distribution of claimants, Table 10.

Case profile During the reporting year, of the 72 matters referred by the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, 41 complaints were Inquiry, 29 complainants sought a review of the Commissioner’s decision to reject or dismiss their complaints, and 2 other complaints were received. Refer Appendix B Table 11.

Notable decisions In Susan Campbell on behalf of Eleanore Tibble and Susan Campbell v FLGOFF Smith, Kowalik and Australian Air Force Cadets (2005) TASADT 7 the Tribunal held that the Anti- Discrimination Act 1998 applies to the Commonwealth and individuals employed or engaged by the Commonwealth. This decision is an important precedent with implications for other cases in Tasmania and other jurisdictions.

In a number of decisions delivered in the year under review the Tribunal considered the approach taken by the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner, in some instances, of rejecting part of a complaint and investigating the balance of the complaint or investigating the entirety of the complaint and dismissing part of the complaint before referring the rest of the complaint to conciliation or to the Tribunal for Inquiry. The Tribunal decided that the Commissioner did not have power under the Act to reject or dismiss part of a complaint: S v L (2004) TASADT 7, O v B (2004) TASADT 9, S v E & K (2005) TASADT 4. Divisions of the Court - Tribunals

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 31

Appeals In the period under review the Supreme Court of Tasmania delivered three decisions concerning appeals from Tribunal decisions. In Mazukov v Anti-Discrimination Tribunal (2004) TASSC 68 the decision related to a preliminary issue of jurisdiction only and the appeals were adjourned for hearing. In Lindisfarne R& SLA Sub-Branch and Citizen’s Club Inc & Anor v Buchanan (2004) TASSC 73 and Bock v Launceston Womens Shelter Inc and Anti-Discrimination Tribunal (2005) TASSC 23 the appeals were determined and in both cases the Supreme Court upheld the Tribunal’s decisions and dismissed the appeals.

Case management As in previous years the Tribunal has continued to promote conciliation as an effective and appropriate method of resolving disputes in this jurisdiction. During the reporting period 30 complaints resolved without the need for an Inquiry. By comparison 26 complaints resolved without need for Inquiry in the previous reporting year.

In the current reporting year, of the 46 Inquiry matters that were completed, 24 complaints (52%) resolved as a direct/indirect result of conciliation provided by the Office of the Tribunal and 20 others (45%) settled either by agreement between the parties without conciliation provided by the Tribunal or were withdrawn/dismissed without conciliation.

As stated in the 2000-1 Annual Report, the Tribunal set a performance measure target of 50% of matters referred for Inquiry being finalised through the conciliation process. It is again pleasing to note that the target set by the Tribunal has been exceeded (52%) in this financial year. The Tribunal’s conciliation process should be regarded as a very effective method of resolving complaints.

Directions conferences have continued to provide an effective vehicle to resolve issues which need to be canvassed before Inquiry hearings. Issues such as exchange of documents, suppression orders, joinder of parties and conciliation options are addressed at these conferences. They are also a venue for jurisdictional objections to be argued and determined.

The detail of directions conferences and the approach taken by the Tribunal continues to evolve and develop in response to the Tribunal’s experience concerning the issues that arise and the needs of the parties. As noted in the last Annual Report, the procedures have been developed to cater for the unrepresented party as the norm. As a consequence of experience the Tribunal’s proceedings have become more summary in nature and the Tribunal is now guided by its own precedents on typical issues. The Tribunal is flexible in its sitting hours and conducts conferences by telephone and video link as appropriate.

Page 32

Training and professional development The annual AIJA Tribunals Conference was held in Sydney in June 2005 and the Chairperson and a number of Tribunal members attended. The Conference programme covered a number of areas of interest relating to legal developments and practical concerns.

The Chairperson also attended the annual meeting of the Council of Australasian Tribunals (COAT) and the Heads of Australasian Tribunals Meeting that were held to coincide with the AIJA Conference in Sydney.

In the year under review the Chairperson attended the National Meeting of Equal Opportunity Tribunals held on the 19 November 2004, in Sydney. This meeting focused on issues of interest to members of Equal Opportunity Tribunals including legal developments in various States, innovative case management practices, inspection of files and presentations by Federal Magistrate Raphael and Professor Rees.

The Chairperson has continued a programme of regular seminars for Tribunal members. These seminars have been well attended by the Tribunal members with the members contributing to the content of those sessions. A range of issues has been addressed such as developments in the law, case management and judicial skills.

On the 18 October 2004 the Tribunal convened a meeting with the Anti-Discrimination Commissioner and staff and the Tribunal members and staff that addressed a range of issues of mutual interest. This meeting proved to be a useful forum for an appropriate exchange of general information about the practices and procedures of the Office of Commissioner and the Tribunal.

Major Outcomes - Report

RAEMOC

Issue: Implementation of an interim case management system (RAEMOC – Registration and Effective Management of Cases).

Report: Administrative efficiencies have been achieved through the application of a computer system, RAEMOC, in 2004, which has helped with the case management of ADT files at a clerical level. There has been a focus on administrative case management resulting in some efficiencies such as streamlining procedures and some appropriate standardization of correspondence. RAEMOC has also proved to be of benefit to the Tribunal members through regular reporting about the status of files. It should be noted that RAEMOC is an interim measure until a whole of Court electronic case management system is implemented in 2006 that should provide further improvements in terms of administrative file management. It will also have a more sophisticated analytical and reporting capacity. As a result of the efficiencies that have occurred and the efficiencies that are expected resulting from the new electronic case management system it is anticipated that there should be an increased capacity for staff at a registrar and clerical level to provide administrative support to the Tribunal.

Electronic Bench-Books Issue: Development of a bench-book for Tribunal members which will be a practical guide containing information about the practice and procedure of the Tribunal. Divisions of the Court - Tribunals

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 33

Report: Work on the bench-book is underway. A number of Tribunal members have made contributions to the draft bench-book and as sections of the Bench-book are prepared they are kept up to date with reference to recent decisions. Because of the magnitude of the task and the importance of the Bench-book it should remain a priority for the Tribunal until the first draft is completed.

Tribunal Goals for 2005/2006

Staff Manual Issue: Another major issue for 2005/6 is the further development of the manual for staff that will record information and procedural steps regarding file management and will also be a central repository of precedent documents. Such a manual will be a useful source of information for current staff and invaluable for new staff unfamiliar with the Tribunal procedures. It is also anticipated that efficiencies will be gained and time saved in searching for information and precedents and some appropriate uniformity will also be achieved

Tribunal Bench-book Issue: Development of a Bench-book for Tribunal members which will be a practical guide containing information about the practice and procedure of the Tribunal and designed to be helpful for the "day to day" work of Tribunal members. Development of the bench-book is a significant undertaking and the Chairperson's proposal is that it should be undertaken as a co-operative effort with all Tribunal members contributing to the document and involved in reviewing the draft. The Bench-book will provide an important reference to improve the knowledge base of members and result in efficiencies in terms of timeliness.

Motor Accidents Compensation Tribunal

Background The appellate jurisdiction exercised by the Motor Accidents Compensation Tribunal was created by section 28 of the Motor Accidents (Liabilities and Compensation) Act 1973.

The Tribunal has jurisdiction to determine appeals (called ‘References’) by persons aggrieved by decisions of the Motor Accidents Insurance Board on such matters as the right of a person to be paid a scheduled benefit or the amount of such scheduled benefit to be paid.

Scheduled benefits are payments of statutory compensation for loss of earnings, medical expenses, and other expenses incurred as a result of personal injury sustained in a motor vehicle accident.

Currently, the Chair of the Tribunal is Deputy Chief Magistrate MR Hill while Chief Magistrate AG Shott and Magistrate PH Wilson are members.

Page 34

Caseload volume of the Tribunal can be found in Table 1 in the Overview chapter, page 11

Mining Division

The Court's Mining Division is created by the Mineral Resources Development Act 1995 and is known as the Mining Tribunal. It exercises a state-wide jurisdiction in disputes relating to mining leases and rights. Deputy Chief Magistrate M.R. Hill has been assigned to this Division since the commencement of the Act and assisted in the reporting year by the Chief Magistrate due to Supreme Court commitments. Refer Appendix B Table 13.

Full details of these matters can be obtained by contacting the Registrar of the Tribunal who is located in the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources.

Divisions of the Court - Tribunals

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 35

CORONIAL DIVISION

Introduction and acknowledgments

The legislation The Coroners Act 1995 commenced on 31 December 1996. The Coroners (Consequential and Miscellaneous Amendments) Act 1995 commenced on the same day (section 2).

For the Coroners Regulations 1996, see Statutory Rules 1996, No 188.

Other relevant statutes and statutory rules include: • Anatomy Act 1964 • Births Deaths & Marriages Registration Act 1999 • Cremation Regulations 1999 • Defence (Visiting Forces) Act 1963 (Cwth) • Human Tissue Act 1985

Duty to report The Coroners Act requires the Chief Magistrate to prepare and submit a Report to the Attorney-General for tabling in each House of Parliament:

69 - (1) The Chief Magistrate must, on or before 30 November in each year, prepare and submit to the Attorney-General a report in relation to the operation of this Act during the financial year ending on the preceding 30 June.

(2) The report -

(a) must include details of deaths of persons held in custody and findings and recommendations made by coroners; and

(b) may include any other matter that the Chief Magistrate considers appropriate.

(3) The Attorney-General must cause of a copy of the report to be laid on the table of each House of Parliament within 10 sitting days after receiving the report.

Period covered by report This Report covers the period from 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005.

Acknowledgments and appreciation The efficient and effective operation of the Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) during the period covered by this Report was made possible only by the cooperative and mutually supportive team effort and professionalism of coroners and their staff. I express my appreciation to those officers.

Further, I acknowledge the Coronial Division’s close working relationship with:

Page 36

• the State Forensic Pathologist Dr C Lawrence, Forensic Pathologist, Dr. R. G. H. Kelsall, approved pathologists, Drs. Don Clark, Terry Brain and their dedicated staff; • Forensic odontologists, Paul Taylor and Marie Wilson and their dedicated staff; • Forensic Science Service Toxicologists, Andrew Griffiths, Bert Stumpers and Frank Halley and their dedicated staff; and • the operators of the Mortuary Ambulance Services.

In addition, the assistance and co-operation of the Office of the Commissioner of Tasmania Police is appreciated.

Scope of the coronial jurisdiction The purpose of this jurisdiction is to learn from the circumstances surrounding deaths, fires and explosions with a view to reducing the likelihood of these arising again in the future. In addition, coroners undertake the primary inquisition into those deaths where the circumstances appear to be suspicious. In the Coroners Act 1995 the jurisdiction of coroners is described as the power to inquire into:

• Reportable deaths; • Fires; and • Explosions.

Section 3 of the Act defines the deaths into which Coroners inquire as follows:

"reportable death" means – (a) a death where –

(i) the body of a deceased person is in Tasmania; or (ii) the death occurred in Tasmania; or (iii) the cause of the death occurred in Tasmania; or (iiia) the death occurred while the person was travelling from or to Tasmania – being a death –

(iv) that appears to have been unexpected, unnatural or violent or to have resulted directly or indirectly from an accident or injury; or

(v) that occurs during anaesthesia or sedation; or (vi) that occurs as a result of anaesthesia or sedation and is not due to natural causes; or (vii) the cause of which is unknown; or (viii) of a child under the age of one year which was sudden and unexpected; or (ix) of a person who immediately before death was a person held in care or a person held in custody; or (x) of a person whose identity is unknown; or

(b) the death of a person who ordinarily resided in Tasmania at the time of death that occurred at a place outside Tasmania where the cause of death is not certified by a person who, under a law in force in the place, is a medical practitioner; or (c) the death of a person that occurred whilst that person was escaping or attempting to escape from prison, a detention centre or police custody; or (d) the death of a person that occurred whilst a police officer or correctional officer was attempting to detain that person; Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 37

Administrative Arrangements

The Court The Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 3A establishes the Magistrates Court of Tasmania and the Coroners Act 1995, section 5 establishes the Coronial Division of that Court.

The Coroners Each Magistrate is a Coroner by virtue of his or her office: Magistrates Court Act section 13. During the period covered by this Report, the Magistrates were:

Hobart: Launceston: Deputy Chief Magistrate MR Hill Chief Magistrate AG Shott Magistrate PF Dixon Magistrate Z Szramka Magistrate IR Matterson Magistrate PH Wilson Magistrate SF Mollard Magistrate SE Tennent Burnie: Magistrate RC Willee Magistrate DJ Jones Magistrate HM Wood Magistrate O McTaggart Devonport: Magistrate TJ Hill

In addition, the Coroners Act 1995, section 10 provides for the appointment of lay coroners.

Other Coroners appointed are:

• Victorian State Coroner, Mr. Graeme Johnstone. • Mr Stephen Carey (Chief Commissioner of the Workers Rehabilitation & Compensation Tribunal (WR&CT) • Mr Rod Chandler (a Commissioner of WR&CT)

Victorian State Coroner, Mr. Graeme Johnstone was appointed Coroner for the State of Tasmania in 2003/2004 and is currently conducting cross-juridictional inquests in Tasmania and Victoria into a number of deaths arising from the use of 4 wheel quad bikes (also known as All Terrain Vehicles or ATVs). This Coronial Inquiry is currently subject to an appeal to the Supreme Court of Victoria.

I would again like to express my appreciation to all Coroners and their staff who have worked extremely hard to reduce the backlog of coronial matters.

Operational support The policy of the Coroners Act is the establishment of an operationally cohesive Coronial Service regulated by state-wide policies and guidelines. Reliable and prompt information exchange is integral to the successful operation of that policy.

Computer support, including e-mail and internet access, is viewed as a cost-effective and reliable means of facilitating the attainment of those ends in both the Hobart and Launceston Coroners’ Offices.

Page 38

Coroners clerks and associates

Hobart: Launceston: Chief Clerk (Coronial Division) Coroners Associate - Mr JA Connolly - Sergeant T Reaney Coroners Clerk - Constable TM Lusted (part-year) - Mrs J Scott - - Constable J Morgan (part-year) - Constable SC Burton (part-year) Coroners Associate - Sergeant PG Coxan - Constable TJ Paterson (part-time) - Constable BL Brazendale (part-time) - Constable CM Catto (part-year) - Constable J Ansell (part-year)

I take this opportunity to thank all those who assisted in operation of the Coroners Office in Hobart and Launceston.

Premises Coroners’ staff are located in 3 offices state-wide: Hobart

Ground floor City Police Station Magistrates Court complex 37-43 Liverpool Street 21 Liverpool Street Hobart 7000 Hobart 7000

Launceston

Police Station Cimitere Street Launceston 7250

Operational arrangements The Chief Magistrate has responsibility for the efficient operation of the Magistrates Court (Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 15(6)) including the Court’s Coronial Division (Coroners Act 1995 section 7).

In addition to those non-statutory powers which are an incident of the Chief Magistrate’s office, statutory provisions invest the Chief Magistrate with administrative powers (Magistrates Court Act section 15) including the power to determine guidelines and to give certain directions (for example, Coroners Act 1995 sections 7, 8, 24, 36, 39, 40 and 43).

It is the policy of the Coroners Act that such powers be utilised in order to create an effective and efficient Coronial Service that operates under common arrangements state-wide to the extent that that is desirable.

Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 39

However, to facilitate the effective and efficient discharge of the operations of the Coronial Division, the Chief Magistrate has delegated the exercise of certain functions and powers to Magistrates (Magistrates Court Act 1987 section 17 and the Coroners Act 1995 section 9). During the period covered by this Report delegated functions and powers were exercised by:

• Deputy Chief Magistrate MR Hill (Hobart) • Magistrate IR Matterson (Hobart) • Magistrate PH Wilson (Launceston) • Magistrate DJ Jones (Burnie)

Throughout the period covered by this Report certain coroners exercised delegations to investigate deaths arising from specific events:

• Magistrate PH Wilson exercised coronial management functions state-wide in respect of aircraft accidents that occasioned fatalities; and • Magistrate DJ Jones exercised coronial management functions state-wide in respect of mining fatalities and fatalities which arise out of the use of a ‘motor vehicle’ in a ‘motor vehicle race’ or ‘reliability trial’. • Magistrate IR Matterson exercised coronial management functions state-wide in respect of fatalities which arise out of certain marine operations and work related ATV (all terrain vehicle) fatalities.

Statistics:

Table 2 - Deaths reported between 2002 - 2005

Description 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Deaths reported to the Coroner 553 625 630 Fires/Explosions reported to the Coroner 0 0 0 Number of inquests held 3 11 13 Number of cases closed 714 718 611 Deaths in custody or care 0 0 3

Source: Tasmanian Coronial Case Management System

Deaths of Persons Held in Custody During the reporting period there were two deaths reported, where the deceased died “in custody”. The Coroner’s Office completed the following outstanding cases that occurred in the preceding year.

Coroner Shan Tennent conducted the Inquest into the death of John Stanton aged 36 years, who died on the 2 May 2002, whilst an inmate at Risdon Prison as a result of self inflicted injuries.

The Coroners findings and recommendations in this case are available on the Court’s website at: http://www.courts.tas.gov.au/magistrate/decisions/coroners/index.htm

Page 40

The death of Thomas Hueston, aged 55 was also reported to Coroner Tennent. Mr Hueston died as a result of natural causes, with his treating medical practitioner issuing a medical certificate of cause of death. Mr Hueston had been treated for a medical condition for a considerable period of time.

Deaths of Persons Held in Care During the period there was one death reported of a person in respite care. At the end of the reporting year, this case was still under investigation.

Findings and Recommendations

Important coronial findings and recommendations delivered by Coroners during the reporting year are published on the Magistrates Court website at: www.courts.tas.gov.au/magistrate/

Coronial Inquests of Significant Public Interest

Victoria Cafasso On 11 October 1995, the body of 20 year old Victoria Cafasso, a 20 year old Italian law student was found stabbed to death on Beaumaris Beach. Ms Cafasso had been in the State less than five days. Despite extensive investigations by Tasmania Police, the offender/s has yet to be found.

Pursuant to Section 24(1) (a) of the Coroners Act 1995 a Coroner is required to hold an inquest into her death.

The inquest proceedings commenced in St Helens on 3 March 2003 and were adjourned on 7 March 2003. More than 40 witnesses gave evidence at the proceedings. At the commencement of the proceedings a mobile phone hotline was set up in a bid to attract more information – more than 50 calls were received during this period.

Following further investigations Coroner Jones recommenced the proceedings on 19th April 2004 at St Helens, with 47 witnesses supplying evidence to the inquest either by fresh affidavits or sworn evidence.

Coroner Jones adjourned the matter on the 23rd April 2004 to consider and to hand down his findings. Coroner Jones handed down his findings on 23 March 2005.

All Terrain Vehicles Due to the high incidence of All Terrain Vehicle (ATV) fatalities in Victoria and Tasmania, the Victorian State Coroner Graham Johnstone was appointed as a Tasmanian coroner to conduct joint cross-border inquests into the initial two fatalities which occurred in Tasmania in conjunction with a number of ATV fatalities that occurred in Victoria.

Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 41

Proceedings have been suspended pending the outcome of an appeal to the Victorian Supreme Court by a group of ATV manufacturers.

Mines Inquest The Chief Magistrate, Mr A Shott, pursuant to section 50 of the Coroners Act directed that Coroner Jones conduct a combined inquest into the deaths of a number of underground miners who died as a result of mine collapses in the west coast region of Tasmania:

Michael Knights, aged 33, date of death, 21/4/2003 Sidney Pearce, aged 43, date of death 5/5/2003 Jarrod Jones, aged 23, date of death 6/6/2001 Matthew Lister, aged 24, date of death 6/6/2001

Inquest proceedings commenced on the 26th April, 2004 with a total of 40 witnesses being summonsed. The proceedings ran for a week and were subsequently adjourned.

Subsequent to re-commencement of the coronial inquest, a number of individuals have been charged with matters associated with the deaths of Sidney Pearce, Jarrod Jones and Matthew Lister . The inquest cannot proceed until these charges have been considered by Courts.

Tasmanian Road Safety Council

The Tasmanian Road Safety Council (TRSC) was established in September 1999 as the principal road safety policy and consultative body in Tasmania with a particular focus on legislative and policy reform, input into national and State programs, and a focus on high-risk road users and behaviours.

As the peak road safety body in Tasmania, the TRSC provides an opportunity for the community and key stakeholders to have input into road safety in Tasmania. The TRSC balances key stakeholder input from organisations such as the RACT, the Coroners Office, and Tasmania Police with other expert input from the Monash University Accident Research Centre. The TRSC has been particularly successful in terms of co-ordination of issues, synergy of activities, policy direction and road safety outcomes.

Over the years, the TRSC has focused on a number of key policy issues such as novice driver licensing reforms, automatic loss of licence for excessive speed, 50 km/h urban speed limits, as well as oversighting the development of the Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy.

The TRSC released the Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy Discussion Paper for public comment in 2001. Over 120 responses to the discussion paper were received. Many of these were very detailed submissions highlighting the issues, as the community and key stakeholders perceived them. This consultation process assisted in the development of the Tasmanian Road Safety Strategy 2002 - 2006, released in November 2001.

Page 42

A critical issue for the TRSC is to ensure public input into road safety issues. The TRSC sees this as necessary to better understanding the road safety issues at the local level. Until recently the TRSC held meetings around the State with Local Government, education, business and community representatives, however since the establishment of the Community Road Safety Partnerships (CRSP) program by the Department of Infrastructure, Energy, and Resources, the TRSC has reviewed how it consults with the community. The CRSP program is seen as a more effective and relevant conduit for community input into road safety issues. The CRSP program has been working across the State with a number of local government councils in establishing community road safety groups. Geraldine Allen, the community representative of the TRSC has been working with the CRSP program coordinator in identifying processes for community input of road safety issues to the TRSC, via these community road safety groups. The TRSC believes the CRSP program is well positioned to gather public opinion about emerging issues in the public arena and bringing them back to the TRSC.

The TRSC has an interest in:

• emerging road safety issues; • public education and policy (including legislation); • road safety research; • engineering and design improvements; and • enforcement activities.

The membership of the TRSC includes:

• Mr Doug Parkinson MLC - (Chairperson) • Monash University Accident Research Centre - Professor Brian Fildes • Community representative - Mrs Geraldine Allan • RACT - Mr Greg Goodman • LGAT - Mr Allan Garcia • Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) - Mr Roger Illingworth • Tasmania Police - Assistant Commissioner Luppo Prins • DIER - Mr David Spence and Ms Angela Conway

The Terms of Reference of the TRSC are:

• to provide leadership in developing the Government’s road safety agenda; • to provide a lateral and innovative approach to road safety issues; • to provide high level advice to the Minister on road safety legislation and policy; • to promote community and stakeholder involvement and ownership of road safety; • to provide input into the development of the Tasmanian and the National Road Safety Strategies; and • to promote the importance of strategies to improve road user behaviour.

Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 43

Tasmanian Transport Industry Safety Group

The Tasmanian Transport Industry Safety Group (TTISG) was formed in July 2000. The purpose of the group is to bring together the key parties with an interest in commercial vehicle safety to work in cooperation to reduce death and injury resulting from the use of commercial vehicles of all types and sizes including buses. The Group achieves this by the following means:

• Acting on the outcome of Coroners' reports or other incident reports; • Raising awareness of safety issues to employers and employees; • Monitoring accident and incident patterns.

The Group meets monthly with an agenda covering reports and discussion on recent incidents, progress on a range of projects, reviews of commercial transport accident trends and safety issues. The Group also recommends joint initiatives to improve safety.

It coordinates an annual safety seminar and produces Transport Industry Safety Advice leaflets on topical subjects.

Most importantly it provides a forum for operators, drivers and government to investigate and progress safety issues arising out of the use of commercial vehicles.

Secretariat support is provided by the Vehicle Operations Branch of the Department of Infrastructure, Energy and Resources (DIER).

Representative bodies on the group include the following:

• Transport Workers Union - Michael Nealer and Bill Noonan • Tasmanian Transport Association - Warwick Counsell • Land Transport Safety Division - David Spence, John Bessell and Paul Olendrowsky (DIER) • Workplace Standards Tasmania - Tony Parnell - (DIER) • Tasmanian Bus Association - Geoff Lewis • Tasmanian Logging Association - David Hazell • Tasmanian Transport Council – Bob Mulcahy • Tasmanian Truck Owners and Operators Association - John Dearing • Tasmania Police - Bill Gallahar • Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) – Jim Connolly

Disaster Planning

The inaugural meeting of the Coronial Services Committee was held on 1 November, 1996, for the purpose of drafting The Coronial Services Plan. The formation of the Coronial Services Committee is part of the consultative process to provide stakeholders with the opportunity to have input into the development of relevant policies. Membership of the Committee is as follows:

• Magistrates Court of Tasmania - Chief Magistrate AG Shott (Chair) • State Emergency Service - Mr G Marsh (Executive Officer)

Page 44

• Magistrates Court of Tasmania - Deputy Chief Magistrate MR Hill • State Forensic Pathologist: - Dr. CH Lawrence • Magistrates Court, Coronial Division – Sgts P. Coxan; T Reaney • Tasmania Police - Inspector J Bird • Department of Premier and Cabinet - Mr P Foulston • Department of Health and Human Services – Ms V Rundle • Tasmania Fire Service – Mr R Hill

The final Plan prepared by the Committee reflects the roles, responsibilities and strategic policies in the management of the after-math of disasters and other incidents involving multiple fatalities. The Plan was forwarded to the State Disaster Committee, and was approved and signed by the Chief Magistrate on 20 December 1999.

Tasmanian Suicide Prevention Steering Committee (TSPSC)

In response to the complex problem of suicide in Tasmania, a number of years ago the Tasmanian Government established an interdepartmental task force known as the Suicide Register Steering Committee (SRSC), which is now known as the Tasmanian Suicide Prevention Steering Committee (TSPSC).

The structure of the committee has evolved in recent years to include support for and encouragement of activities aimed at preventing suicide, promoting mental health and well being, identifying areas of concern and keeping of up to date statistical data.

The terms of reference are:

• Highlight special areas of concern. • Collate information on current activity. • Identify areas of need for preventative action, within a state and national context, leading to a coordinated focus for government activity within Tasmania. • Act as advisory committee to the National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy Project Officer. • Act as reference group to the University of Tasmania National Youth Suicide Prevention Strategy training and education program. • To ensure inter-departmental support for the on-going maintenance and further development of a continuous database for completed suicides in Tasmania. • Provide data, with appropriate provisos on reliability, as required by government and ensure departmental support for the continuous database for completed suicides in Tasmania. • Produce for the Minister for Health and Human Services, an annual report on the data, set against comparative trends and epidemiological data at the state and national level.

It was acknowledged that the role and membership of the Committee might further change in line with the Commonwealth Government’s ‘fighting suicide’ strategy.

The current committee membership is: • Community Support Deputy Directorate - Wendy Quinn – Chair (DHHS) • Community Support Deputy Directorate - Justinian Habner (DHHS) • Lifeline - Connie Alomes • Department of Police & Public Safety – Malcolm Direen • University Department of Rural Health - Martin Harris Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 45

• Mental Health Services - Ray Kemp, Chris Nolan, Peter Norrie (DHHS) • Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing - Ian Martin, Jacinta Spry • Dept of Education (Equity Standards Branch) - Esmé Murphy, • Mental Health Services / private psychologist - Stephen Pinkus • Magistrates Court, Coronial Division - Jenny Scott, • Dept of Education (Office of Youth Affairs) - Miranda Sonners

Australasian Coroners’ Society Inc

The Australian Coroners’ Society (ACS) was established in 1992 and was incorporated in 1995 and subsequently changed its name to the Australasian Coroners’ Society inc. The Society’s membership consists of coroners from all Australian States and Territories, New Zealand, and Papua New Guinea. The Chief Magistrate as well as other magistrates are members of the Society.

Forensic pathologists from all Australian jurisdictions, coronial managers as well as grief counsellors have the ability to become associate members of the Society and to participate fully in each Annual Conference of the Society.

The objects of the Society are to foster learning and understanding of the coronial jurisdiction between those engaged in a profession, occupation or field of study relevant to coronership.

A number of Tasmanian Coroners actively engaged in coronial practice attended the ACS Annual Conference in Darwin in September 2004. A series of interesting Papers were delivered on a variety of topics including reviews of coronial jurisdictions in the UK and NZ, mass casualty incidents and disaster victim identification in the Bali bombings; Cultural Issues in Aboriginal deaths; specialist forensic pathology; and mental health issues connected with reportable deaths.

Mortuary Ambulance Service

The Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) on behalf of the Tasmanian Government has the responsibility for the removal and transport of deceased persons when:

a) no certificate as to the cause of death has been or will be issued by a Medical Practitioner, or; b) the death is a “reportable death” within the meaning of the Coroners Act 1995.

At the direction of the Crown, the mortuary ambulance service also includes:

a) the transfer of a body or bodies from one public mortuary to another public mortuary for autopsy; b) the return of a body or bodies from a public mortuary (after autopsy) to a public mortuary nearest to the place of burial/cremation of the deceased; or

All transportation of deceased persons from one region of the State into another region is at the direction of the Crown and determined by the Crown with reference to the most cost effective service offered.

Page 46

The mortuary ambulance service is on call 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

Major Outcomes - Report

Enhancement and promotion of NCIS Issue: A concerted effort will continue to be made within the Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) to ensure that all coronial data is up-loaded to the NCIS in an accurate and timely manner to enhance the utility and marketability of the NCIS to all Australian coronial jurisdictions, as well as third party external research agencies and organisations. All Tasmanian coroners and coronial staff will continue to receive briefings and training on the use of the NCIS.

Report: The National Coronial Information System (NCIS) was established in 1998 to provide data to assist Coroners and their staff in the investigation of coronial cases. The NCIS was endorsed by the Standing Committee of Attorneys General (SCAG) in 1997 and a number of other Ministerial Councils (Consumer Affairs, Police and Industrial Relations) in 1998.

Monash University National Centre for Coronial Information (MUNCCI) was appointed by the Australian Coroners Society (ACS) in 1997 to develop and operate NCIS.

In 2004, management of NCIS was transferred to the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine (VIFM).

The NCIS system, which became operational in July 2000, is a database which provides coronial and other third party users with death information provided by coroners in each jurisdiction. In addition, a case management system was developed for all jurisdictions, other than New South Wales and Victoria, to facilitate the capture of coronial information for uploading into the national system. The case management system is also used as a management tool by the coronial jurisdictions.

During the reporting year the Tasmanian Coroners Office participated in NCIS Coder training workshops to ensure consistency of data entered into NCIS for public health and death prevention research purposes. The forums provide an opportunity for Coroners’ Associates and Clerks to discuss the coding of various data items from both typical and atypical cases. MUNCCI and VIFM have provided feedback to all jurisdictions about the accuracy and completeness of data sets in NCIS as part of its Quality Assurance program.

The Coroners Office staff are improving the accessibility of data in NCIS by loading electronic copies of the Police Report of Death, autopsy and toxicology reports, and the Coroners findings in as many cases as possible.

There is an increasing awareness of the value of NCIS data. Reports were extracted from NCIS during the reporting year for various jurisdictions on topics such as All Terrain Vehicles (Quad Bikes), blind cord strangulation, logging deaths, epilepsy-related MVA deaths, ultralight aircraft & hangliding fatalities, MVA "distractions" (ie. mobile phone usage, drinking/eating, etc), doctor shopping, overloaded vehicles, and rockfishing (particularly involving those from non-English speaking backgrounds).

Cross-jurisdictional relationships Issue: State Coroners and their equivalents have formalised arrangements under the title of ‘Council of Heads of Australian Coronial Jurisdictions’. It is expected that memoranda of understanding will be finalised with various Commonwealth agencies to ensure that effective working relationships in the field occur during parallel investigations between Coroners, Coroners’ Associates, and:

• Australian Transport Safety Bureau (in relation to fatal road, marine and rail accidents); Divisions of the Court - Coronial

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 47

• Civil Aviation Safety Authority (in relation to fatal aircraft accidents); and • Australian Defence Force (where ADF personnel die during active service or training exercises within Australia or overseas.)

Report: The Chief Magistrate (as head of the coronial jurisdiction in Tasmania) has been appointed to undertake the coordination of negotiations with the Commonwealth Agencies listed above on behalf of all State and Territory coronial jurisdictions. Although initial progress was made, other parties in some Federal Government Agencies or State Coroners have raised policy and operational issues which have delayed finalisation of the MOUs.

Australasian Coroners Society Inc. website Issue: The Magistrates Court (Coronial Division) has undertaken to design, develop and maintain a functional website for the Society. In addition to providing information about the Society, it is intended that the site become the central repository for past and future conference papers. This will ensure that these papers are accessible to all jurisdictions that participate in the conferences.

Report: The Magistrates Court has now developed and published the ACS website, hosting it on the Court’s server. The website can be accessed at www.australasiancoroners.org

Researchers Issue: Pursuant to Section 28 of the Coroners Regulations 1996, the Chief Magistrate may make available to any person for the purposes of medical, sociological or scientific research the Court file and any other record relating to the investigation or inquest. Researchers must agree to adhere to strict guidelines relating to non-publication of identifying details and other matters.

Report: The following organisations, groups, individuals conducted research in the following areas during the period covered in this Report: • Dr.Kathryn Campbell, Government Analytical and Forensic Laboratory (GAFL) now Forensic Science Service Tasmania – (FSST) - Research on behalf of Motor Accidents Insurance Board (MAIB) and Federal Office of Road Safety (FORS) in relation to the potential causative roles of drugs in fatal Motor Vehicle accidents - it is hoped that due to the nature of the research that the project will be extended; • Federal Office of Road Safety (FORS) - All motor vehicle fatalities; • Australian Bureau of Statistics - Coding of all sudden deaths; • Department of Health and Human Services – Drug related deaths; • Manager, TasFire Training and Community Education – Fire related fatalities; • Chris Black – Shark related fatalities; • Andrew Brooks, Senior Lecturer, Latrobe University – Fatal Incident on School and Youth Camps; • Forest and Forest Industry Council of Tasmania - Forestry related fatalities; • Tasmania Law Reform Institute - firearm fatalities; • Paediatric and Morbidity Board – specializing in sudden infant death, but also includes in its criteria deceased youth up to the age of 14 years.

Page 48

COURT Objectives - 2005-2006

The major projects identified by the Court Management Group as having high priority during the 2005-2006 year are set out below.

CRIMES IT System

“CRIMES” IT case management system for the Court’s criminal jurisdiction is being enhanced to provide more structured interfaces with the IT system for managing fines and debtors (called “FIND”). The benefits of these enhancements are:

• Creation of more structured fields within CRIMES to ensure more consistency in data entry and thus greater ease in reporting processes; • Ensuring that CRIMES is web-enabled and the provision of real-time data and corrections to FIND via XML; • The adoption of the XSLT style-sheet for the production of Court documents providing consistency between registries and between the Magistrates and Supreme Courts; • The creation of an XML interface will enable other authorised bodies (eg Community Corrections, Tasmania Police etc) to also receive relevant data from CRIMES in a structured, consistent manner.

The enhancements made to CRIMES are a precursor to the planned introduction into Parliament in early 2006 of the Monetary Penalties Enforcement Bill. The Monetary Penalties Enforcement Bill will change the way infringement notices and fines are enforced in Tasmania. These changes will deliver benefits to the Magistrates Court in many ways, and finally bring Tasmania into line with all other Australian jurisdictions concerning enforcement of minor regulatory offences and monetary penalties.

The major benefits of the new system to the Magistrates Court are:

• The removal from the Court system of people who receive infringement notices and opt to “do nothing”, thus ensuring that only those persons who genuinely wish to contest an infringement notice are brought before the Court. The current practice of having to prosecute all unpaid infringement notices in Court is inefficient and resource intensive to all concerned; • The cessation of the practice of returning a fine defaulter to Court; 2006

• The cessation of the use of Warrants of Apprehension to enforce an unpaid fine. / Such warrants are inefficient and resource intensive for Tasmania Police to serve and for the Court to administer; 2005 • The ability of the MPES to determine appropriate payment instalments without - referring the matter back to a Magistrate; • In conjunction with the Fines Enforcement Unit, Monetary Penalties Enforcement Project finalise transfer to XML schema of all CRIMES data for web services

interface with Fines Enforcement and XSL Templates for creation of documents ectives such as Memorandum of Sentence; j • Complete the upgrade to Lotus version 6.5.4 state wide to ensure a more robust and faster operating system; • Complete implementation of CRIMES in the Supreme Court.

Court Objectives Court Ob 2005/2006

Annual Report 2004 - 2005 Page 49

Safe at Home Family Violence Act 2004 Implementation

Continue the development of appropriate practices and procedures to deal with the increase in case volume following the proclamation in March 2005 of the Family Violence Act 2004.

• Finalise the Magistrates Court Virtual Experience. An Internet based tour of the Magistrates Court with an emphasis on the criminal and civil aspects of the Court using Family Violence as the major case study. To educate and inform adults and children of the Court process, the Court layout and roles of the various Court officials; • Monitor and evaluate the impact of the new jurisdiction on activity and performance within the Court, including access to the Court, expeditious and timely process, effectiveness of published literature and staffing levels; • Provide greater CRIMES access for users of the Integrated Case Management System to enable timely transfer of information on Court outcomes to support personnel working with victims of family violence.

Criminal & General Division Legislation

Finalise for proclamation the Magistrates Court (Criminal& General Division) Act to replace the Justices Act 1959

• Evaluate the draft legislation and accompanying rules; • Consult with practitioners, Department of Police and Public Safety, Director of Public Prosecutions and other interested parties; • Educate and inform all Court users of all changes in practice and procedure; • Facilitate the necessary changes to CRIMES and other registry systems; • Train Court staff in the new practices and procedures.

Civil Registry Management System

Complete, in conjunction with the Supreme Court, the development of a civil registry information management system for use in both Courts. Features should include:

• Listing and diary management • Electronic filing, searching and pre-trial management • Finance and payment processing • Integration with digital recording and CRIMES.

Page 50

Appendices

Appendix A Legislation Administered in the Magistrates Court

Appendix B Statistics

Appendix C Financial Statement

Appendix D Court Locations

Appendix E Organisational Structure

APPENDIX A Tasmanian Legislation Administered in the Magistrates Court

Access to Neighbouring Land Act 1992

Acts Interpretation Act 1931

Admission to Courts Act 1916

Adoption Act 1988

Alternative Dispute Resolution Act 2001

Annulled Convictions Act 2003

Anti-Discrimination Act 1998

Appeal Costs Fund Act 1968

Auctioneers and Real Estate Agents Act 1991

Bail Act 1994

Civil Liability Act 2002

Classification (Publications, Films and Computer Games) Enforcement Act 1995

Common Law (Miscellaneous Actions) Act 1986

Commonwealth Powers (Family Law) Act 1987

Consumer Credit (Tasmania) Act 1996

Coroners Act 1995

Corporations (Tasmania) Act 1990

Costs in Criminal Cases Act 1976

Criminal Code Act 1924

Criminal Justice (Mental Impairment) Act 1999

Criminal Law (Detention and Interrogation) Act 1995

Criminal Procedure (Attendance of Witnesses) Act 1996

Crowd Controllers Act 1999

Crown Proceedings Act 1993

Debtors Acts 1870 and 1888

Defamation Act 1957

Disposal of Uncollected Goods Act 1968

Dog Control Act 2000

Door to Door Trading Act 1986

Electoral Act 1985

Electronic Transactions Act 2000

Evidence (Audio and Audio Visual Links) Act 1999

Evidence Act 2001

Evidence (Children and Special Witnesses) Act 2001

Evidence on Commission Act 2001

Fair Trading Act 1990

Fatal Accidents Act 1934

Forensic Procedures Act 2000

Goods (Trade Descriptions) Act 1971

Housing Indemnity Act 1992

Justices Act 1959

Law of Animals Act 1962

Legal Profession Act 1993

Limitation Act 1974

Limited Partnerships Act 1908

Listening Devices Act 1991

Local Government (Highways) Act 1982

Magistrates Court (Administrative Appeals Division) Act 2001

Magistrates Court (Children's Division) Act 1998

Magistrates Court (Civil Division) Act 1992

Magistrates Court Act 1987

Mental Health Act 1996

Mercantile Law Act 1935

Mineral Resources Develoipment Act 1995

Minors Contracts Act 1988

Misuse of Drugs Act 2001

Oaths Act 2001

Partnership Act 1891

Penalty Units and Other Penalties Act 1987

Police Offences Act 1935

Promissory Oaths Act 1869

Records of Offences (Access) Act 1981

Relationships Act 2003

Residential Tenancy Act 1997

Road Safety (Alcohol and Drugs) Act 1975

Sale of Goods Act 1896

Search Warrants Act 1997

Second-hand Dealers and Pawnbrokers Act 1994

Security and Investigations Agents Act 2002

Sentencing Act 1997

Status of Children Act 1974

Supreme Court Civil Procedure Act 1932

Trade Measurement Act 1999

Traffic Act 1925

Traffic (General and Local) Regulations 1956

Traffic (Miscellaneous) Regulations 1968

Traffic (Road Rules) Regulations 1999

Traffic (Vehicle Loads and Dimensions) Regulations 1975

Unordered Goods and Services Act 1973

Vehicle and Traffic Act 1999

Victims of Crime Compensation Act 1994

Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995

Wrongs Act 1954

Youth Justice Act 1997

APPENDIX B Statistical Information

Civil Division

Figure 1 is a graphic comparison of the volume of civil cases and minor civil claims cases lodged between 2001 and 2005. This data has been extracted on a state-wide basis from the Civil Information Management System.

Figure 1 - Civil cases lodged 2001-2005

Total Civil Cases Lodged

14000 13500 13000 12500 12000 11500 11000 10500 10000 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Nature of Case 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Personal injury 25 19 14 13 Debt recovery 8 029 8 101 7 299 7454 Australian registered judgement 203 182 222 155

Restraint Order Applications 3 638 2 547 2 547 3332 Residential tenancy 448 551 496 403

Other 1 339 1 322 882 297 Total 13 682 12 722 11 460 11 654

Source: Civil Information Management System (CIMS) & Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES)

Table 3 sets out the volume of debt recovery matters in which a Judgment Creditor proceeded to enforcement of the Judgment

Table 3 - Enforcement process for civil debt recovery cases 2001-2005

Enforcement Process 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Warrant to Sell Property 2 655 2 240 1 995 1542 Garnishees 1 345 1 189 1 911 1431 Judgment Summons (incls. Oral Examination of Judgement Debtor) 107 141 61 59 Warrant of Possession 26 54 45 42 Total 4 133 3 624 4 012 3074 Source: Civil Information Management System

Administrative Appeals Division Figure 2 is a comparison of applications filed over three reporting periods (2002/03 to 2004/05). Table 4 show the outcomes of the applications considered, while the legislation under which the appeals arose can be seen in Table 5.

Figure 2 -Applications received 2002-2004

Number of Applications Received Administrative Appeals Division

30 25

20

15 10 5 0 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Type of application 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Review (Appeal) of a reviewable decision - Section 17 13 17 22 Entitled to reasons for decision - Section 15(1) 2 1 3 Extension of time to apply for review of decision - 2 7 1 Section 20

Total 17 25 26

Source: Civil Information Management System

Table 4 – Outcomes of applications 2002-2005

Description of Outcome 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Decisions 3 7 9 Withdrawn 2 2 3 Pending or listed for Court’s consideration 12 6 6 Dismissed - 4 7 Reserved for decision - 3 1 Adjourned sine die - 6 - Total 17 28 26 Source: Civil Information Management System

Table 5 – Acts giving rise to appeals 2003-2004

Legislation 2003-04 2004-05

Auctioneers’ and Real Estate Agents Act 1991 3 5 Firearms Act 1996 1 2 First Home Owners Act 2000 2 1 Fishing (License Ownership and Interest) Registration Act 2001 3 1 Local Government Act 1993 2 1 Passenger Transport (Review of Decisions) Regulations 2000 1 1 Public Health Act 1997 1 4 Rail Safety Act 1997 1 2 Taxation Administration Act 1997 3 5 Vehicle and Traffic Act 1999 1 2 Vehicle and Traffic (Driver Licensing and Vehicle Registration) 2 1 Regulations 2000 Unclassified 8 1 Total 28 26 Source: Civil Information Management System

Mediation and Conciliation Table 6 sets out the data on assisted dispute resolution processes conducted by the Court during the reporting year. Mediation and conciliation conferences are held primarily in civil disputes, but have increasingly been used in other jurisdictions such as anti-discrimination, child protection, and appropriate restraint order applications.

Table 6 – Mediation & conciliation conferences - Civil

Item 2003-04 2004-05 Number % Number % Civil Mediation / Conciliation Conferences held 570 100% 590 100% Settled at Conference by Consent Judgment 394 69% 359 61% Settled after Conference or Listed for Trial 176 31% 231 39%

Source: Mediators records

Table 7 – Mediation & conciliation conferences – Other (s.52)

Item 2004-05 Number %

Settled at Mediation / Conciliation Conferences 43 100%

Relationships Act 2003 This reporting year the number and outcomes for applications received under the Relationships Act 2003 is set out in Table 8

Table 8 Applications received & outcomes

Item 2003-04 2004-05 Consent Orders 16 48 Adjourned Sine Die 3 1 Settled at conciliation 1 1 Settled by court order - 3 Total Applications 20 53 Source: Civil information records

Tribunals

Table 9 below demonstrates the areas of activity and grounds of complaint with respect to those complaints referred to the Tribunal for Inquiry during 2004-2005. There has been a slight decrease in the number of complaints overall, compared with the previous reporting period. However, there has been a notable increase in the number of complaints arising from allegations of harassment, and victimisation.

Anti-Discrimination Tribunal Table 9 – Complaints referred to Anti-Discrimination Tribunal for Inquiry1

Description 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Grounds of Complaint - Discrimination: Gender 5 5 9 Pregnancy 2 2 1 Race 3 12 5 Sexual orientation 4 3 2 Disability 9 8 3 Family responsibilities - 6 1 Age 1 2 6 Industrial activity 5 1 4 Irrelevant criminal record - - 3 Sexual harassment - - 2 Relationships status - - 1 Marital status - - 1 Victimisation 2 1 3 Total 35 43 41

Areas of Activity Employment 27 23 31 Goods/services 4 10 5 Education and Training 2 6 1 Accommodation - 1 4 Total 34 43 41 1. In many of the above complaints, allegations were made relating to a number of grounds under the Act. It should be noted that the table only identifies the primary allegation contained in the complaints.

Table 10 – Regional base of claimants for Inquiries & Reviews received - 2002 - 2005 Region 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

North 12 (17%) 29 (34%) 17 (24%) South 43 (61%) 49 (58%) 39 (52%) North West 14 (21%) 6 (8%) 16 (24%) Other 1 (1%) - - Total 70 84 72

Table 11 – Flow of Matters 2002 - 2005

Description 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 1 Matters unfinalised at Start of Period 82 90 90

Received in period: Referred for Inquiry by Anti-Discrimination 35 43 41 Commissioner Applications for Review of Anti-Discrimination 34 41 29 Commissioner’s decision Other Matters Received 1 - 2

Finalised in period: Inquiries finalised by conciliation 11 23 24 Inquiries finalised by settlement between the 33 6 parties Inquiries Heard 3 7 2 Inquiries finalised –complaints 12 4 14 withdrawn/dismissed without conciliation Reviews Quashed - - 1 Reviews finalised 33 51 17 Matters finalised by the end of the period 62 88 64

Matters unfinalised at End of Period 90 86 98 1. Note: The maters unfinalised at the start of the period (2004/2005) were amended to reflect cases that were closed in 2003/04 and then re-opened in 2004/05.

Figure 3 - Anti-Discrimination Tribunal matters finalised 2004 -2005

Method of Finalisation 2004/05

Quashed 2% Withdraw n 16% Conciliated Settled 37% betw een Par ties

9% Closure Reason Total Conciliated 24

Dismissed De cis ion Decision Handed Down 19 6% Hande d Dismissed 4 Dow n Settled between Parties 6 30% Quashed 1 Withdrawn 10 Grand Total 64

Timeliness

The timeliness of finalisation of matters by the Tribunal during the reporting year is a measure of efficiency. Figure 4 sets out the age of matters that were finalised during the reporting year regardless of when they were received.

Figure 4 - Report against performance criteria – time (all matters)

40% 2003-04 35% 2004-05 30%

25% 20% 15% 10%

5% 0% 2003-04 2004-05 Finalis e d Finalis e d Finalis e d Finalis e d > 18 Performance Criteria % % w ithin 6 w ithin 12 w ithin 18 months Within 6 months 26% 25% months months months Within 12 months 30% 34% Within 18 months 19% 14% Greater than 18 months 25% 27% TOTAL 100% 100%

Motor Accident Tribunal Table 12 shows the number of references lodged with the tribunal over the last three reporting years, and the status and outcomes for these.

Table 12 – References lodged 2001-2004

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Matters settled after pre-trial directions 44 47 2 Adjourned sine die after pre-trial directions 41 38 19 Listed for trial 1 561 Consent Orders - - 18 Withdrawn - - 7 Decisions - - 1 Listed for pre-reference conferences - - 3 Adjourned prior to pre-reference conference - - 4 Settled - - 3 Dismissed - - 10 Total Lodgements 104 96 68 Source: Criminal Registration Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES). 1. Includes some pre-trial directions conferences.

Mining Tribunal

Table 13 – Mining Tribunal matters lodged 2001-2005

Description of Outcome 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Referred to Tribunal for hearing 4 1 2 9

Criminal Division

Table 14 sets out the volume of criminal cases lodged during the reporting year. This data has been extracted from the state-wide electronic database known as the Criminal Registry Information Management Enquiry System (CRIMES), and reports by offence category as defined by the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ Australian Standard Offence Code (ASOC).

Table 14 – Total Criminal matters lodged

Principal Offence 2003-04 2004-05 Homicide and related offences 20 25 Acts intended to cause injury 2 431 3 146 Sexual assault and related offences 172 188 Dangerous or negligent acts endangering persons 523 625 Abduction and related offences 2 1 Robbery, extortion and related offences 79 101 Unlawful entry with intent/burglary, break and enter 1 132 811 Theft and related offences 2 225 1 871 Deception and related offences 577 653 Illicit drug offences 918 963 Weapons and explosives offences 420 408 Property damage and environmental pollution 683 727 Public order offences 1 961 1828 Road traffic and motor vehicle regulatory offences 47 485 45 058 Offences against justice procedures- • breach of bail 3 863 3 578 • breach of restraint order 407 589 • breach of non –custodial sentence 245 296 • resist Police Officer 1 672 1 519 • fine default proceedings 3 057 749 Miscellaneous offences 1 248 1 295 Total 69 1201 64 4311 Source: Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES).

1.These figures relate to all lodgements of complaints for offences, and related applications. By comparison the counting rules for the Council of Australian Governments (COAG) Reports on criminal lodgements refer to the number of defendants appearing in Court rather than the number of complaints and applications.

Magistrates Court (Children’s Division)

Table 15 – Applications for orders lodged 2001-2005

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Care and Protection Orders 288 173 153 203

Source: Criminal Registration Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES)

Youth Justice Division The following Table shows the number of criminal matters dealt with in the Court’s Youth Justice Division during the current and previous reporting years.

Table 16 – Youth Justice Criminal matters lodged 2001-2005

2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Offences against the person 386 691 331 429 Offences against property 918 1 144 1 052 1 007 Drug Offences 22 38 32 47 Breach of Orders 41 629 102 85 Other (minor traffic) 752 257 231 218

Total 2 119 2 759 1 748 1 786 Source: Criminal Registration Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES)

Coronial

Figure 5 - Inquests & Investigations Completed during 2004-2005

Inquests & Investigations Domestic Drug Fall Accident Drowning Overdose 5% 2% 4% 7% Aircraft Homicide 0% 1% Number of Inquests & Investigations Hospital Completed Vehicle 3% Accidents Description 2003-04 2004-05 House Fire 25% 3% Undetermined Aircraft 4 1 Cause Industrial Domestic Accident 11 4 Figure 6 - InquestsSuicide & InvestigationsSIDS Othe r – Motor Vehicle Fatalities Completed during 6% Accident 36% 1% 5% Drowning 19 9 2004-2005 2% Drug Overdose 22 15 Fall 14 10 Homicide 18 3 Source: Tasmanian Coronial Case Hospital 6 7 Management System House Fire 6 7

Industrial Accident 7 5 Other 17 11 SIDS 3 3 Suicide 101 76 Undetermined Cause 12 13 Vehicle Accident 68 56 Total 308 220

Motor Vehicle Categories 2004/05

Motorcycle

13% Bicycle 2%

Passenger 23% Dr ive r 52% Bystander/ Pedestrian 10% Category Number Driver 27

Bystander/Pedestrian 5 Passenger 12 Bicycle 1 Motorcycle 7 Total 52

Figure 7 - Inquests & Investigations – % of Self inflicted Completed during 2004-2005

Self Inflicted Categories 2004/2005

Drow ning

3% Jump Gunshot 3% Other Hanging 16% 9% 29%

Number of Inquests & Investigations Burns Self Inflicted 1% Description 2003-04 2004-05 Carbon Drug Monoxide Hanging 31 22 Overdose 32% Carbon Monoxide 23 25 7% Drug Overdose 6 5 Burns - 1 Gunshot 10 12 Drowning 6 2 Jump 4 2 Other 3 7 Total 83 76

Table 17 - Coronial Case Backlog 2003 - 2005 2003-04 2004-05 Timeliness Standard Tas National Tas National (%) Average (%) (%) Average (%)

Pending Cases > 6 mths. 38.9% 45.7% 36.6% Avail Jan

Pending Cases > 6 mths. 38.9% 45.7% 36.6% Avail Jan Pending Cases > 12 mths. 19.7% 25.9% 17.5% 2006 Source: Report on Government Services 2004

Performance Indicators 2004-2005

In previous years the performance assessment of the Magistrates Court focused on the timeliness of the resolution of matters. This single measure has now been replaced by the more informative:

Backlog Indicator - a measure of effectiveness in relation to timeliness and delay; Clearance Rate - an efficiency measure of the inputs per output unit; and Attendance Indicator - an effectiveness measure of timeliness and delay.

Nevertheless, these measures should be treated as indicative rather than definitive. This is because the Court does not have total control over the process for adjudicating criminal matters, resolving civil disputes and investigating coronial matters, and consequently other parties may introduce delays.

Backlog Indicator This indicator is a measure of case processing timeliness. This measure has been developed on a national basis as a means of determining the performance of a Court.

In the criminal jurisdiction, those defendants that have bench warrants associated with them have been excluded from the count, and in the civil jurisdiction those lodgements that have not been acted upon in the last 12 months have been excluded. The aim has been to focus on those matters that are part of an ‘active pending’ population.

The backlog indicator measures the Court’s pending caseload against timeliness standards and the Court’s performance is set out in Table 18.

The indicator recognises that case processing must take some time and that such time does not necessarily equal delay. Timeliness can be affected by delays caused by factors other than those related to the workload of the Court (for example, a witness not being available).

Table 18 – Backlog indicator, the number and proportion of pending caseload in excess of timeliness standards

Jurisdictions 2003-04 2004-05 Number % Number % Criminal Pending caseload (no.) 21 980 18 292 Cases > 6 mths. 4 183 19.0% 3060 17% Cases > 12 mths. 1 819 8.3% 1189 7% Youth Justice Pending caseload (no.) 390 477 Cases > 6 mths. 81 26% 113 25% Cases > 12 mths. 55 10% 42 7%

Children’s Pending caseload (no.) 603 632 Cases > 6 mths. 170 28.2% 155 25% Cases > 12 mths. 75 12.4% 42 7% Coroners’ Pending caseload (no.) 244 246 Cases > 6 mths. 95 38.9% 90 36.6% Cases > 12 mths. 48 19.7% 43 17.5% Civil Pending caseload (no.) 5 212 5529 Cases > 6 mths. 2 019 38.7% 2000 36% Cases > 12 mths. 200 3.8% 242 4% Source: Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES) and Civil Information Management System (CIMS).

Clearance Rate The clearance rate is an indicator of efficiency in processing the inflow of cases through the Court and has been agreed nationally as a measure of whether a Court is keeping up with its workload. The Court’s performance against this measure is set out in Table 19.

The clearance rate is the number of finalisations in the reporting period divided by the number of lodgements in the same period (multiplied by 100 to convert to a percentage).

The following should assist in understanding the clearance rate:

• A figure of 100 per cent indicates that, during the reporting period, the Court finalised as many cases as were lodged; • A figure greater than 100 per cent means that the pending caseload of the Court is decreasing. • A figure less than 100 per cent means that the pending caseload of the Court is increasing.

The clearance rate can be affected by external factors, such as changes in legislation, as well as by changes in a Court’s case management practices.

Table 19 Clearance rate % (finalisations/lodgements)

2003-04 2004-05

Magistrates Criminal 91.5 84.7 Civil 102.7 100.7 Total 93.3 92.7

Children’s Criminal 97.5 81 Civil 102.8 90.6 Total 97.8 85.8

Coroners’ 115.6 99.7

Source: Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES) and Civil Information Management System (CIMS)

Attendance index The Attendance index is based upon the number of Court attendances required to resolve a matter has been identified nationally as an appropriate effectiveness measure. At present, this measure is only available in the criminal jurisdictions and Table 20 shows the Court’s performance against this measure.

The number of attendances is the number of times that parties or their representatives were required to be present in Court to be heard by a judicial officer or mediator/arbitrator (including appointments which were adjourned or rescheduled).

This year’s Report presents the total number of finalisations during the year and the number of attendances associated with these matters (no matter when the attendance occurred). This approach simply represents an average number of attendances per finalisation.

In the context of the attendance indicator, it is important to note that Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) can resolve certain matters out of Court and thereby reduce the number of Court attendances.

Table 20 - Attendance indicator 2003-2005 Average listings per case 2003-04 2004-05 Criminal Magistrates 1.9 2.0 Children’s 5 4.5 Coroners’ 0.1 0.1 Source: Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES)

Case management

The management of Court matters is undertaken in all jurisdictions with a view to reducing elapsed times to final disposition in order to provide improved access to justice at reasonable cost to litigants.

During the reporting year in the Court’s criminal jurisdiction, three principal case management tools continue to be used:

• the personal diary system (known in the United States as the “Individual Docket System” or "I D S") by which individual Magistrates take responsibility for the timely disposition of matters before them;

• the contest mention system which is based upon the system that operates within the Magistrates Court of Victoria and which has been successfully adapted to southern Tasmania; and • the system of adjournment Courts.

The personal diary system operates in all the Court’s Registries.

Table 21 below sets out the details of contest mention Courts held. Efficiencies gained within the entire criminal justice system are manifest, particularly in relation to the saving of witnesses’ attendance (often Police Officers who can attend to other Police duties), and re-allocation of Magisterial sitting time to other proceedings. The figures are for Hobart only.

No contest mention Courts were convened in the other registries of Launceston, Devonport and Burnie.

Table 21 - Contest Mention Court Statistics 2001-2005

Financial Deft’s Deft’s sent Deft’s Prosecution Witnesses Sitting Year Referred to trial Plea of matters excused time to after Guilty withdrawn saved Contest Contest (No Mention Mention evidence tendered) No. No. % No. % No. % No. Hours

2001-2002 1 104 398 36 677 61 29 3 1 632 1 116 2002-2003 1 343 278 21 963 71 102 8 740 541 2003-2004 1 330 374 28 869 65 87 7 1 220 706 2004-2005 953 285 30 564 59 104 11 571 460

Source: Criminal Registry Information Management & Enquiry System (CRIMES)

The following table provides data on the level, number of lodgements for Criminal, Civil and Coronial matters in the Magistrates Court for the period 1999 - 2005.

Table 22 - Number of cases lodged 1999-2005

1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05

Criminal 49 654 63 308 52 946 73 378 69 120 64 431

Civil 13 010 13 122 13 682 12 722 11 460 11 654

Coronial 590 608 618 552 617 630

Source: Court databases

Appendix C Financial Statement

The Magistrates Court contributes to the Department of Justice output entitled ‘Administration of Justice’ and the Court’s funding is set out in Table 23 below.

Table 23 - Expenditure by outlay - Magistrates Court Services 1.

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Actual Actual Actual $'000 $'000 $'000

511 - Salaries and Wages 5,051 5,151 5,634 512 - Other Employee Related Expenses 118 107 148 521 - General Administrative Expenditure 2. 212 - - 522 - Information Technology 257 178 262 523 - Personnel Expenses/Materials Supplies & Equip 2. 16 317 247 524 - Travel and Transport 238 287 252 525 - Property Expenses 812 768 859 528 – Other Expenditure 529 577 573 529 - Consultants - - 100

Total 7,233 7,385 8,075 Source: Department of Justice, Financial Management Information System

1. The totals include expenditure from both the Consolidated Revenue Fund and revenue retained by the Court. 2. The Department of Justice modified the chart of accounts and their usage. Therefore, some of the totals for 2002-03 are not directly comparable to the previous year.

Appendix D Court Locations

Courts

Permanent Registries are maintained in each of the four cities. These Registries also have filing and general administrative responsibilities for Courts that are located in adjacent smaller centres. The registry also has filing and administrative responsibility for Courts held in other smaller localities throughout the state.

Permanent Registries

Burnie 38 Alexander Street, Burnie Currie Tasmania 7320 Whitemark P O Box 690 Burnie Tasmania 7320 DX: 70228 Burnie Smithton Telephone: 03 6434 6398 Fax: 03 6434 6224 Georgetown

Burnie Devonport 8 Griffith Street, Devonport 7310 Devonport Scottsdale P O Box 208, Devonport 7310 Westbury Launceston DX: 70331 Devonport Telephone: 03 64 217 892 St Helens Fax: 03 64 217 881 Campbell Town Fingal

Swansea Hobart Queenstown 23-25 Liverpool Street Hobart 7000 Oatlands G P O Box 354 Hobart 7001 DX: 138 Hobart Telephone: 03 6233 3610 New Norfolk Fax: 03 6233 6115 Hobart

Huonville Launceston 73 Charles Street, Launceston 7250 P O Box 551 Launceston 7250 DX: 70121 Launceston Telephone: 03 6336 2605 Fax: 03 6331 1538

Temporary Registries

Appendix E ORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE

Chief Magistrate Magistrates x 11

Administrator of Courts Department of Justice Jim Connolly

Criminal Civil Coronial - Criminal & General - Civil Division Office Manager Division - Anti-Discrimination Tribunal Jenny Scott - Youth Justice - Motor Accident Compensation - Children’s Division Tribunal - Residential Tenancies - Mining Division - Administrative Appeals Division

Criminal Hobart Deputy Administrator Paul Huxtable Civil Hobart Manager – Civil Division Evelyn Robertson Criminal & Civil Launceston Manager/Clerk of Petty Sessions

Roger Illingworth

Criminal & Civil Devonport Acting Manager Linda Faulkner

Criminal & Civil Burnie Manager/Clerk of Petty Sessions Natalie Luttrell

Magistrates During the period covered by this Report, the Magistrates were: Launceston: Hobart: Chief Magistrate AG Shott Deputy Chief Magistrate MR Hill

Magistrate Z Szramka Magistrate PF Dixon

Magistrate PH Wilson Magistrate IR Matterson

Magistrate SF Mollard

Burnie: Magistrate RC Willee

Magistrate DJ Jones Magistrate HM Wood

Magistrate S Tennent (1/7/04 to 21/2/05)

Devonport:

Magistrate TJ Hill

Temporary Magistrate(s): Magistrate M McKay Magistrate O McTaggart

Table 24 - Magistrate Court staffing (expressed as Full Time Equivalents)

2003-2004 2004-2005 Details No. Totals No. Totals Magistrates (permanent) - Male 10 10 - Female 2 12 2 12 Magistrates (temporary) - Female 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 Administrative Support Staff - Male 21.5 21.5 - Female 45.5 67 44 65.5

TOTAL 79.5 77.7