JUDGES’ ANNUAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 DECEMBER 2001
PARTS ONE AND TWO
This work is copyright. Apart from any use as permitted by the Copyright Act 1968, no part may be reproduced by any process without prior written permission.
Enquiries to: Chief Executive Officer Supreme Court of Victoria 210 William Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000
Tel 03 9603 6210 Fax 03 9603 6352
This report is also available on the internet at http://www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au
JUDGES’ ANNUAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 DECEMBER 2001
PART ONE
2 May 2002
John Landy, A.C., M.B.E. Governor of the State of Victoria and its Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia
Dear Governor
We, the Judges of the Supreme Court of Victoria have the honour to present our Report pursuant to the provisions of the Supreme Court Act with respect to the year 2001.
Yours sincerely
J. H. Phillips, C.J. John Winneke, P. W. F. Ormiston, J.A. John D. Phillips, J.A. Stephen Charles, J.A. F. H. Callaway, J.A. J. M. Batt, J.A. Peter Buchanan, J.A. Alex Chernov, J.A. F. H. R. Vincent, J.A. Barry Beach, J. Bernard G. Teague, J. P. D. Cummins, J. Allan W. McDonald, J. T. H. Smith, J. David Ashley, J. John Coldrey, J. David Byrne, J. D. L. Harper, J. G. M. Eames, J. H. R. Hansen, J. Philip Mandie, J. Rosemary Balmford, J. E. W. Gillard, J. Murray B. Kellam, J. M. L. Warren, J. Bernard D. Bongiorno, J. D. J. Habersberger, J. G. R. Flatman, J. Tony Pagone, J.
Form of the Report Rules Committee For this year we have resolved to present our Annual The Rules Committee met 18 times during 2001. As a Report in parts. What follows is Part One of those result of its work the Council of Judges made the Rules parts. of Court listed below on the dates there set out.
Four sets of rules were made amending Chapter I. The Appointments and Retirements first, Amendment No.16, modified the rules relating to group proceedings in consequence of the enactment of On 5 March The Honourable Mr Justice Ian Gray Part 4A of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and made ceased to be a Reserve Judge. other minor amendments. Amendment No.17 widened
the operation of Order 58 in respect of appeals from an On 15 May Mr Michael Joseph Louis Dowling, Q.C. order of the Children’s Court, because of the Children was appointed a Master of the Court. and Young Persons Act (Reciprocal Arrangements ) Act
2000. Amendment No.18 made miscellaneous On 30 May The Honourable Mr Justice Robert Clive changes to Chapter I by way of revision, including, Tadgell retired after 21 years of service. among other things, express provision for costs on an
indemnity basis and for the taxation of unpaid On 12 June The Honourable Justice Frank Hollis Rivers disbursements. Amendment No.19 substituted a new Vincent, a Judge in the Trial Division was appointed a Appendix A, reflecting an increase in the scale of costs Judge of Appeal. of 3.94 per cent as recommended by the Costs Co-
ordination Committee to reflect changes in the cost of On 3 July Mr David John Habersberger, Q.C. was living. appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court, in the Trial
Division. The Chapter II Amendment No.3 Rules, in addition to
revising the rules relating the registration of foreign On 18 July Mr Geoffrey Raymond Flatman, Q.C. was judgments, substituted a new Order 12 relating to jury appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court, in the Trial service appeals in consequence of the commencement Division. of the Juries Act 2000.
On 30 August The Honourable Justice John Joseph As to Chapter III, the Amendment No.5 Rules Hedigan, a Judge in the Trial Division, retired. introduced provision for "domestic partners" in relation
to applications for the grant of administration of a On 2 October Mr Gaetano (Tony) Pagone, Q.C. was deceased estate, following upon the enactment of the appointed a Judge of the Supreme Court, in the Trial Statute Law Amendment (Relationships) Act 2001. Division. Amendment No.6 increased the scale of professional
charges because of the goods and services tax. On 30 October The Honourable Mr Justice Alec James
Southwell ceased to be a Reserve Judge. Chapter IV of the Rules deals with proceedings for
adoption and the Amendment No.3 Rules made During the periods from 2 January to 6 April; 25 June miscellaneous changes in the light of the Adoption to 13 July and 10 to 21 September The Honourable (Amendment) Act 2000. Justice Howard Tomaz Nathan, a Reserve Judge, performed the duties of a Judge. Chapter V consists of rules made under the
Corporations Law, rules which are now largely uniform During the periods from 20 to 30 August; 3 to 28 between all States and Territories. The Amendment September; 5 to 31 October; 1 to 16 November and 1 No.5 Rules and the Amendment No.6 Rules were both to 14 December The Honourable Mr Justice Norman made in order to implement amendments put forward Michael O’Bryan, a Reserve Judge, performed the by the Harmonisation Committee established at the duties of a Judge. direction of the Council of Chief Justices.
Finally, during 2001 the Chief Justice, the Chief Judge The Council of Judges of the County Court and the Chief Magistrate of the The Council of Judges met on ten occasions during Magistrates’ Court together re-made the rules under 2001. The Executive Committee and the Chief Justice the Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991 because the and Principal Judges group met, on an average, every Courts (Case Transfer) Rules 1991 were due to expire two or three weeks. after ten years in operation.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 1
Rules Made by the Council of Judges Judicial Remuneration Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No.16) Rules It is a matter of regret that the Government has, in 2001 - 29 March 2001 effect, rendered inoperative the intention of Parliament Supreme Court (Chapter V Amendment No.2) Rules that judicial remuneration be reviewed regularly by the 2001 - 29 March 2001 Tribunal appointed under the Judicial Remuneration Act Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No.17) Rules 1995. The establishment of the Tribunal under the Act 2001 - 30 May 2001 and its annual independent review of judicial Supreme Court (Chapter V Amendment No.3) Rules remuneration thereafter until early 2001 reflect the 2001 - 30 May 2001 recognition that the judiciary be, and be seen to be, Supreme Court (Chapter II Amendment No.3) Rules independent of the Executive Government. In early 2001 - 26 July 2001 2001, the then members of the Tribunal retired from Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No.18) Rules office, but the Government has failed to replace them. 2001 - 25 October 2001 Hence, for practical purposes, the Tribunal ceased to Supreme Court (Chapter III Amendment No.5) Rules exist from early 2001. Late last year the Government 2001 - 25 October 2001 sought to amend the Act and it was assumed that it Supreme Court (Chapter IV Amendment No.3) Rules intended to fill the vacancies on the Tribunal once the 2001 - 25 October 2001 amendments were passed, although such an intention, Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No.19) Rules if it existed, was not communicated to this Court. It is 2001 - 29 November 2001 also accepted that the passage through Parliament of Supreme Court (Chapter III Amendment No.6) Rules the Government’s proposed amendments has been 2001 - 29 November 2001 delayed by amendments that were sought to be introduced by the Opposition. The amended legislation became law on 3 April 2002, but to this day, the Government has not appointed new members to the Practice Notes Tribunal. The Government’s inaction in this regard has There were four Practice Notes published during the meant that, in contrast with the situation in other States year. and at the Commonwealth level, the salaries of the Practice Note No. 1 – Transcript in the Specialist Lists Judges and Masters of this Court have not been Practice Note No. 2 – Building Cases reviewed after the end of the year 2000. In the result, Practice Note No. 3 – Building Cases Arbitrations the judicial salaries of this Court have dropped below Practice Note No. 4 – Supreme Court Divisional List those of comparable courts in Australia, including those whose workload is significantly less than that of this Court. The consequence is that the recruitment to this Judicial Resources Court of high calibre practitioners has been put at risk. In our last Report we stated, “Throughout 2000 the Judges and Masters of the Court have had to address an ever increasing workload of complex and lengthy Superannuation Surcharge litigation with judicial resources which are patently We understand that it is the intention of the inadequate for the task.” That situation has continued Commonwealth Government to reduce the surcharge during 2001. The urgency of redress of this matter from 15% to 10.5%. This will, however, constitute but cannot be overemphasised for in the year ending 30 a minor amelioration of the present unfair and June 2001 this Court took in 4,840 matters (not discriminatory imposition on Judges and Masters. We including probate). continue to urge the Commonwealth Government to
review the effect of this legislation upon the members of
the Court. Budget Issues The Court has continued to have allocated to it by the Department of Justice an allocation which lacked any Public Information Desk rationale or logic in its original composition and which During the year a public information desk staffed by has been eroded by 12 years of annual “productivity volunteers from the admirable Court Network gains” – a euphemism for cuts of at least 1.5% per organisation and a security officer was established in annum. the foyer adjacent to the Court’s main entrance in
William Street. We extend our grateful thanks to the
volunteers for the excellent service they provide in assisting the public.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 2
Judicial College of Victoria For as long as I can remember we have been looking in this country to improve pre-trial The Judicial College of Victoria Act received Royal hearings by the search for effective sanctions Assent on 29 May and is to come into operation on and better incentives, without any real success. 1 February 2002. The Act provides for a Board of Your solution is, therefore, of great interest to Directors to conduct the activities of the College, me.” chaired by the Chief Justice. It includes other heads of jurisdictions together with Professor Peter Sallmann and Professor Enid Campbell. Until the passage of this Act, no provision has been made for the necessary Building Activities funding. An initial task for the Board will be the The year saw the completion of a new courtroom, appointment of a College Director. Court 15, by way of a conversion of space which had, a number of years ago, formed part of the Registry. In the same area a Theatrette was completed with a Funds in Court capacity to provide video-conferencing and the transmission of evidence from other places, including Throughout the year the Department of Treasury and overseas. The Court was opened by the Chief Justice Finance continued its efforts through the Department of on 21 December. It is a matter of great pride for us Justice to remove the Senior Master’s investment that the great bulk of the necessary work was activities from him and place them with State Trustees. performed by the Court’s own team of tradesmen. We These efforts we have opposed. We remain of the view congratulate Messrs Peter Chapman and Ron Niemer that the Senior Master’s demonstrated performance in on their success in building up such an expert and both investment and service to the beneficiaries is dedicated group. The same team renovated a room for clearly superior to that organisation. the use of women barristers which was opened by the
Chief Justice in May. A deal of work was done on the
cells so as to bring them up to the standards Corporate Services Manager established in the aftermath of the Royal Commission We report the appointment in June of Mr J. Paterson as into deaths in custody. The administration area was Corporate Services Manager. We are pleased to obtain air-conditioned. We express our thanks to the the services of such an experienced administrator and Department of Justice and the Historic Buildings we are confident he will be able to render valuable Council for the provision of funds. assistance to the Chief Executive Officer.
Pegasus Two Hearings Trial Division This system of hearings which precede criminal trials has continued successfully. We are pleased to note Common Law Division that in his recent report on the English criminal justice The Judges of the Common Law Division in 2001 were system, Criminal Courts Review, The Rt. Hon. Lord Mr Justice Beach, Mr Justice Ashley (Principal Judge) Justice Auld commended a system of this sort which and Justices Smith, Hedigan, Eames, Balmford, Gillard, involves voluntary co-operation between the profession Kellam and Bongiorno. and the Court in an informal setting. His Lordship had previously written to the Court: As already noted, Justice Hedigan retired in September. Justice Kellam, as in 2000, was mainly “I am very interested in the scheme you have committed to work with VCAT. Justice Bongiorno was adopted and the success of it without any appointed to the Division in Fourth Term; but he formal sanctions or particular incentives. It is all continued to do mainly criminal trial work until the end the more remarkable that you have achieved of the year. Justice Smith was fully occupied by two that success without making orders or giving matters for the whole of the year – an extremely long directions in the hearings. Major factors for its trial; and a number of difficult interlocutory applications success seem to be that you sit outside normal in a second matter. Mr Justice Ashley and Justice court hours in order to ensure the presence of Eames presided over complex, multi-party trials which trial counsel and that you have the full co- extended over nine and 13 weeks respectively. The operation of all the professional participants. appearance of numbers and the actual availability of judges for what might be called the day to day Common Law Division work thus differed considerably.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 3
Despite the problem of numbers the Division’s work, Administratively, with the support of the court's whose broad ambit was described in the Annual Report information technology section the SCALIS database for 2000, was conducted so as to keep pace with the was adapted for the purposes of the Major Torts List. inflow of litigation. Its work was a significant contributor Presently the stored data includes a list of each party to to the Productivity Commission Report which a proceeding and that party's solicitor – including e- highlighted the performance of the Trial Division of this mail addresses; categorisation of each matter; and Court on the civil side. notation of the way in which the directions stage terminates in the case of each proceeding (for The disposition of cases fixed for trial in Melbourne will example, by settlement, referral to the Listing Master, or be detailed in a later Part. the setting of a date for trial). Planning is underway to extend the database so as to store a complete history These figures will not take account of the many of each order made in a proceeding. It is anticipated interlocutory matters, together with Practice Court and that the database will be used to generate large group circuit matters which were heard and disposed of by e-mails to selected solicitors, informing them of relevant judges of the Division. The Practice Court was, for the news or directions pertaining to the entire list or to a most part, staffed by a judge of the Division; and civil select sub-list or group of cases. circuits at Ballarat/Bendigo, Mildura, Shepparton/Wangaratta and Warrnambool (twice) A further administrative development was the setting up were conducted, except in one case, by judges of the of an e-mail address, Division. [email protected], this facilitating communication between solicitors and the associate to The amount of civil circuit work at particular provincial the Judge-in-Charge of the list. In particular, the e-mail centres continued to vary greatly. A number of circuits facility was increasingly used for the transmission of were gazetted but not held because work was draft orders for review and authentication by the judge. insufficient. By contrast, work at one centre necessitated two circuits; and both were busy. Much In the course of the year a number of proceedings appears to depend upon the attitude of local which had been commenced in the Major Torts List practitioners – that is, in deciding whether to institute were referred to particular judges of the Division for certain proceedings in this Court or the County Court. management and trial. That occurred in the case of There may remain in some quarters a perception, proceedings arising out of the Longford gas explosion; though it is quite wrong, that the Court is not and in the case of proceedings by a lung cancer committed to circuit work. sufferer against a tobacco company. This Court’s reputation can only be enhanced by the efficiency with Two specialist lists continued to be conducted within which those substantial matters were managed. It may the Division: the Major Torts List and the Valuation be added that the fate of the first of the two Compensation and Planning List. They require proceedings, procedurally, continues to depend upon separate comment. whether the legislation which authorises group proceedings survives challenges in the High Court. Justice Hedigan was the Judge-in-Charge of the former list from its inception until his retirement in September With respect to group proceedings, our Report for the 2001. His outstanding contribution to the development year 2000 predicted a likely increase in the number of of the List must be acknowledged. He was succeeded such proceedings if the pertinent legislation survived as Judge-in-Charge by Justice Bongiorno, who began challenge. However, there was some evidence this to build upon the work that Justice Hedigan had done. year of a different situation – that is, of selected persons He has introduced a number of case management and in a group launching individual proceedings. The likely administrative changes. course of events should the legislation survive challenge remains somewhat uncertain. A procedure was thus instituted by which the judge-in- charge allocated trial dates in selected proceedings Valuation, Compensation and Planning List rather than referring all proceedings to the Listing The Judge-in-Charge of this List during the year was Master for that purpose when the directions phase was Justice Balmford. The cases in this List concern completed. Again, sub-lists for groups of cases valuation of land, compensation for the acquisition of requiring particular management (for example, land and planning appeals, and may include other proceedings concerning the so-called economy class matters involving land use and environment protection. syndrome) were established.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 4
By virtue of Rules 8.02 and 8.03 of Chapter 2 of the Applications for leave to appeal from orders of the Rules the List comprises (in summary) any proceeding planning list of VCAT are heard by the Judge-in-Charge in the Trial Division: of the Valuation, Compensation and Planning List, normally on the monthly directions day, and parties are (a) on an objection to assessment under Division advised that an application should take no longer than 4 of Part III of the Valuation of Land Act 1960; one hour. The table shows the result of three years’ operation of the leave requirement so far as it relates to (b) being a disputed claim under Part 10 of the those applications. It should be noted in this context Land Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986 that the Annual Report of VCAT for 2000-2001 shows or to which the procedure under Part 10 that over 3,000 cases were finalised in the VCAT applies; planning list in each of the years 1999-2000 and 2000- 2001. (c) by way of appeal on a question of law (including the application for leave to appeal) Year Refused Percent Granted Percent Consent Percent Total from the Land Valuation List or the Planning List of the Administrative Division of the 1999 4 44 1 11 4 45 9 Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (“VCAT”); 2000 4 24 6 35 7 41 17
(d) by way of referral from either of those VCAT 2001 2 17 7 58 3 25 12 lists on a question of law; and
(e) any other proceeding which the Judge-in- These figures would seem to reflect an increasingly charge of the List is satisfied raises a relevant realistic attitude by the profession to the likelihood of question. success in a particular application for leave.
Seventeen cases were entered in the List in 2001 and The administration of the List is facilitated by the fact 12 cases were pending as at 31 December 2001. that much of the work is handled by a small number of During 2001 judgment was delivered in seven cases solicitors and counsel who thus have extensive and as at 31 December 2001 one decision was experience in and knowledge of the jurisdiction. reserved. Cases in the list are normally heard by the Interlocutory matters are frequently disposed of by Judge-in-Charge of the List. consent. While the preparation of cases may well be a lengthy process, generally it can be said that they keep Directions hearings are normally held on the last Friday moving. The small number of practitioners regularly of the month, and where necessary, applications for involved means that there is no users’ committee, but directions can be dealt with at other times. It is the members of the profession have not hesitated to raise practice in the List to fix dates for hearing well in matters relating to the administration of the List at the advance, which seems to suit the parties and those monthly directions day. who practise in the jurisdiction.
Most planning matters are dealt with at first instance by VCAT, which replaced the Administrative Appeals Criminal Division Tribunal (“AAT”) on the enactment, with effect from 1 The Criminal Division for 2001 comprised Justices July 1998, of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Vincent (Principal Judge until 4 June 2001), Teague Tribunal Act 1998 (“the VCAT Act”) and ancillary (Principal Judge after 4 June 2001), Cummins, Coldrey, legislation. Section 148 of the VCAT Act, providing for Bongiorno and Flatman (after 18 July 2001). an appeal to this Court on a question of law from an order of VCAT, introduced a requirement for leave to The work of the Division was affected by the need for appeal, which had not existed in the case of appeals many more trials to be held in 2001 at circuit courts. from the AAT. The operation of that requirement was The judges are committed to sitting in the circuit courts. considered by the Court of Appeal in Secretary to the It is important that, where possible, criminal trials are Department of Premier and Cabinet v Hulls [1999] 3 VR heard in the community where the alleged offences 331. have been committed. Some ground lost in 2000 in meeting targets for the disposition of cases was made up early in 2001, but some ground was lost in the second half of the year with the increase in circuit work.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 5
The Judges in the Division were willing to sit at times on The Commercial List judges and the Judge-in-Charge the Court of Appeal. Indications were received that the of the Corporations List conduct direction hearings Court of Appeal and the profession would appreciate each Friday in the Old High Court building. This them doing so. Unfortunately, the number of criminal arrangement and liaison between the judges enable the trials has meant that Judges in the Criminal Division appearance of practitioners in more than one List. could not be spared for appellate work. The remedy must be to have a sixth judge appointed to sit in the The separate appointment of Justice Hansen to the Division. Corporations List has enabled a more equitable spread of judicial work in the Commercial List. Justice Hansen Increasing use was made in criminal trials of technology makes himself available to hear urgent matters with including videolinks for directions hearings and the which the Senior Master is unable to deal. When it is taking of evidence. appropriate, Corporation proceedings are also listed for trial before a judge in the Commercial and Equity Links within the Division, between Divisions, and Division. between the Division and the profession were strengthened through meetings as deemed In addition to the business involved in the specialist appropriate. Lists, a large volume of work was disposed of by judges sitting in the Commercial and Equity Division. Mr John Andrews in the Criminal Trials Listing This high level of productivity received very favourable Directorate continued to work with the judges and the comment in the most recent report of the Productivity profession to facilitate the appropriate fixing and Commission. allocation of trials. Throughout the year, the Division has been greatly assisted by the activities of the Listing Master, Master Kings. To her fell the onerous tasks of determining Commercial and Equity Division many interlocutory matters and fixing trial dates for The judges comprising this Division in 2001 were proceedings – tasks which she also performed for the Justices McDonald (Principal Judge), Byrne, Harper, Common Law Division. Accommodation of both long Hansen, Mandie, Warren, Habersberger and Pagone. cases and urgent matters, which cannot be heard in Senior Master Mahony dealt with appropriate the Practice Court, adds to the complexity of this work. corporation proceedings and Master Evans dealt with interlocutory applications and other proceedings in the business of the Division. Specialist Lists within the Division Justices Habersberger and Pagone, who were Commercial List appointed to the Court during the year, brought to the Purely commercial cases are entered in this List. Division a wealth of experience and capacity – Details concerning the List requirements and guidelines particularly in the field of commercial law and practice. are contained in a court booklet “Guide to Commercial
List Practice” which is available on the Court Website On 31 August Justice Mandie retired as Judge-in- Charge of the Commercial List and was replaced by www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au (from the index Justice Warren who had been a judge in that List for select “Publications and Papers”). Proceedings are the previous two years. Justice Habersberger was conducted by two judges on an expeditious basis with appointed the second judge in that List. The workload the general expectation that each case should be of the List has been particularly heavy. It includes subject to no more than three directions hearings; be urgent Corporation matters. given a trial date by 12 weeks after commencement, and go to trial and judgment within a further 12 week period. On 14 December 2001 the Chief Justice announced that as from 4 February 2002 Justice Hansen would be Directions hearings are conducted on Fridays, but Judge-in-Charge of the Corporations List. This special arrangements are made for urgent matters appointment of a specialist judge was designed to which, on occasions, can have a trial date fixed in less improve efficiency in the disposal of this part of the than four weeks from commencement. Special Court’s business. Justice Hansen subsequently gave arrangements are also made for lengthy cases with up his appointment as Judge-in-Charge of the Taxation those of an estimated duration of up to ten days being Appeals List, being replaced by Justice Pagone. set down for hearing before the judge who has managed them throughout the interlocutory stages and directions hearing.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 6
Matters of even longer duration are usually referred to Intellectual Property List the Listing Master to be fixed for trial before other This list has been continued to be maintained and used judges in the Commercial and Equity Division. by parties and practitioners during the year although it
is appreciated that much of this work is dealt with in the References of cases to mediation routinely take place Federal Court of Australia. when they are set down for trial and considerable success occurs in terms of complete or partial resolution of these matters. It is our experience that cases which actually go to trial tend to be both long Building Cases List 2001 and complex and the number of these is increasing. The Annual Report for 2000 noted a change in the profile of the cases in the list in favour of commercial Proceedings in the List usually involve evidence-in-chief buildings and engineering works. This trend has being given by way of previously exchanged witness continued in 2001 with an increased emphasis on statements and the use of court books of documents commercial buildings disputes. In the last quarter these agreed upon between the parties. Generally speaking, two types of cases represented all but five cases in the trials are conducted on the issue of liability with the list. assessment of damages, where relevant being usually deferred. In appropriate cases, such assessments may Activity in the list during 2001 (comparable figures for be referred to one of the Court’s Masters. The year 2000 appear in brackets) saw an increase in the number of matters going to judgment. Pending Entered Disposed Set Down Pending at in List of for Trial at 1/1/01 31/12/01
Corporations List 44 (31) 36 (33) 26 (17) 13 (3) 41 (44) The year has seen the number of Corporations cases increase in volume, complexity and duration. The Federal Court of Australia resumed Corporations jurisdiction on 15 July but that fact has not had any During the year 36 cases were entered in the list. Of discernible impact on this Court’s Corporations the 26 cases which were disposed of, 22 were settled, business. A practice was developed that involves most at or following mediation. Thirteen cases were Corporations business directions hearings being taken brought to a stage where they were ready to be set at 12.00 (noon) on Fridays. If possible, interlocutory down for trial. These figures, of course disclose applications were also dealt with on those days with nothing about the expedition with which the cases were other arrangements being made for longer cases. dealt with in the list. Of the 26 cases disposed of in the list, not including those set down for trial, the average period in the list was 12 months and the median 11 A number of complex ASIC (Australian Securities and months. This represents a slight improvement over the Investments Commission) matters were heard in the preceding year. List. As these cases commonly warrant expedition due to the nature of allegations made, the judges’ policy is The Judge-in-Charge of the list has continued the to dispose of them as promptly as possible, practice of meeting with the list users group comprising consistently with the competing demands of the representatives of the following interest groups: the Commercial List. Victorian Bar, the Law Institute, architects, engineers and building consultants. Following consultation with Taxation Appeal List this group and with the Listing Master and the A profile of the work of that list is as follows: Prothonotary, two new Practice Notes were issued in November, No 2 of 2001 dealing with practice in the list List Type Number Entered Disposed Pending generally and No 3 of 2001 dealing with practice upon in List at List or in List as applications arising out of building arbitrations. 1/1/01 during Removed at 2001 during 31/12/01 2001 Victorian 4 (3) 17 (4) 12 (3) 9 (4) Taxation Appeals (Comparable figures for 2000 appear in brackets in the Table)
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 7
Admiralty List Instances such as this illustrate the difficulty of ensuring that the Court fulfils it commitment to giving parties to Two new cases were entered and seven cases were complex litigation a certain date for commencement of settled during the year. No case was brought to trial. trial. The majority of cases in the list comprise claims arising out of damage to cargo. Although the volume of cases in this List is moderate, some cases are significant. In any event, we consider that it is necessary to maintain this List as a service to Victorian Admiralty litigants and Masters their practitioners. Master Cain has continued to carry out the functions formerly performed by Master Gaffney. Activity during 2001 (comparable figures for 2000 appear in brackets) Since his appointment, Master Dowling has performed the functions with respect to civil appeals formerly performed by Master Cain, save as to taxation of costs Pending Entered Disposed Referred Pending in some appeal matters. Master Dowling has also at 1/1/01 list of to trial at assisted from time to time in the work of the ‘General’ 31/12/01 Masters, Masters Evans and Wheeler, particularly during the absence of either. 10 (19) 2 (3) 7 (12) 0 (1) 5 (10)
The Taxing Master, Master Bruce, in addition to his
work in the jurisdiction known as the ‘Litigation Support
Group’, now taxes costs with respect to all Long Cases List proceedings in the Court, i.e., the Court of Appeal and Previous Annual Reports have described the operation the Trial Division. and purposes of the Long Cases List. They have also included a definition of a “long case”. It is therefore Otherwise, the work of the Masters continues in much unnecessary to deal with those matters here. the same way as detailed in the Annual Report for the year 2000. The management of long cases continues to be the responsibility of the Listing Master, assisted as The Masters continue to be very concerned about the occasion requires by the Judge-in-Charge of the Long impact on them of the superannuation surcharge, Cases List. They, together with other judicial officers, which does not apply to judges appointed before 7 meet regularly with members of the profession in the December 1997, but applies (most unfairly) to all Court's Litigation Committee, the object of which is to Masters whenever appointed; and because of its discuss matters of concern with special emphasis on inappropriate application to persons who have a non- improving the administration of litigation. contributory pension (properly so called).
There were 42 cases in the list as at 1 January 2001. A further 31 were entered or reinstated during the year, with one case being removed. A further 26 were Court of Appeal disposed of in that period, leaving 46 pending as at 1. Overview 31 December 2001. The median period between date 1.1. On 4 September 2001 the judges of the of commencement and date of disposition for the year Supreme Court submitted to the Governor of the State was 55.5 months (compared with 48.8 months in the of Victoria their report for the year 2000. It was a year 2000). The mean period between date of comprehensive report of the Court’s activities for the commencement and date of disposition was 59.5 relevant year; but the comprehensiveness resulted in months (55.3 in 2000). Seventy five percent of cases its publication well into the year of 2001. As a were disposed of within 71.5 months of consequence, there were a number of significant commencement (62.2 months in 2000) and 90% were events which happened within the Court of Appeal in disposed of within 93.6 months (77.9 months in 2000). the current year, upon which the Court of Appeal felt The difference in rates of disposition in 2001 is in part obliged to report. at least explicable from the fact that one case, the hearing of which was estimated to occupy four weeks 1.2. The Court will not repeat what was said in at trial, began in February and did not end until 16 the Report of the year 2000, save to say that it was in October. the current year that Mr Justice Tadgell retired after 21 years of service to the Supreme Court and its Court of Appeal; and that Master Gaffney retired in May 2001
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 8
after equally lengthy service to the Court as its Registrar 2. Trends in the Court of Criminal Appeals and, since 1995, as Registrar of the 2.1. Since the establishment of the Court of Court of Appeal. The judges of the Court of Appeal Appeal in 1995 as a permanent Division of the take this further opportunity of acknowledging the Supreme Court, its business has continued to grow. enormous contribution made by Mr Justice Tadgell and Perhaps this is not surprising because it is, for the vast Master Gaffney to the Court over such a long period. majority of litigants in the State, the final court of resort. Their respective positions within the Court structure It is also the Court which, subject to the right of special have been filled by Justice Vincent and Master Cain leave to appeal to the High Court, will state – and apply who, in the current year, have quickly and competently – the law for citizens of this State. The judges of the filled the shoes of their predecessors. Court assume this burden seriously and are involved in
discharging it, not only in court hours, but at night and 1.3. This Report for the 2001 year will, of course, week-ends. not be published until some time in April/May 2002.
That, of course, means that significant events which 2.2. As we have pointed out in previous reports, have occurred since the end of the year 2001 will, in the work of appellate judges is demanding; as indeed the normal course of events, have to await the next is that of the judges of the Trial Division who are also Annual Report. One of the most significant events responsible for supervising the work of inferior courts in which has occurred in the intervening period, and the hierarchy. During the course of the year very few which should not have to await the Report for 2002, is Trial Division judges were available to assist in the the retirement of Justice Brooking in March 2002 after disposition of the business of the Court of Appeal 25 years of service as a judge of the Supreme Court because of the volume of business in the Trial Division. and, since its inception in 1995, of the Court of Appeal. The Court was, however, fortunate to have the It is in the nature of courts that they are “fluid” assistance of Mr Justice O’Bryan as an additional judge institutions, whose complements are constantly of appeal for a significant portion of the latter half of the changing. However, in this day and age, when the year. emoluments of judges are so inferior to those in the profession who are qualified to replace them, it can be said with confidence that the gap which has been 2.3. In its report for the year 2000, the Court noted created generally in the Supreme Court by the that it was concerned at the number of outstanding retirement of Justice Brooking will be very difficult to fill. “conviction” appeals at the end of that year. As the The State, and its citizens, owe a significant debt of tables published hereunder will show, that problem was gratitude to Justice Brooking. We, his colleagues, confronted during the course of the year 2001. wish him and his wife Joan a happy and productive retirement. 2..4. A feature of the year 2001 has been the 1.4. In this context it is worth noting that the quality emergence, in the civil jurisdiction of the Court, of “long of administration of justice in this State is, and can only appeals” which have required careful management but, be, as good as those who are appointed to administer notwithstanding, have occupied the time of three it. Because justice administration in our courts is judges of the Court for several weeks of the year, both largely dependent upon the application of common law in hearing and consideration. Similar lengthy appeals principles, the primary source for securing will confront the Court in 2002. replacements for superior court judges has been, and should continue to be, the Victorian Bar whose members spend their professional lives applying those principles. It is, therefore, disappointing to have 3. The Registry observed a growing difficulty in “recruiting” suitable 3.1. The Court is fortunate to have its own Registry candidates from that source. The reasons for this with a dedicated and competent staff. It was, until emerging reluctance are, no doubt, many and varied. May 2001, under the control of Master Gaffney, a highly One thing, however, is clear; and that is that the respected judicial officer of the Supreme Court for over government must ensure that the salaries and other 20 years. It is equally fortunate to have, as his emoluments of its superior court judges keep abreast replacement, Master Cain who has taken over the role of their counterparts in other states and in the Federal of Registrar. Court.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 9
3.2. The advantage of having a separate Registry They, along with the qualified associates assist the of Appeals is that the President is able to be informed, President’s associate (as editor) in compiling the upon inquiry, not only of the state of the civil and Court’s “Summaries of Judgments” which are criminal lists, but also of the status of certain appeals or circulated regularly to the Profession in Victoria and to applications which need urgent attention. In its judges of courts in this and other states. criminal jurisdiction, the Court owes an obligation to hear and dispose of applications as quickly as possible, 4.3. The Court, once again, takes this opportunity and certainly within a time frame consistent with the of expressing its thanks to all of its staff who have prisoner’s status. Crown appeals must be disposed of served it with dedication during the course of the year. promptly because the respondent is being exposed to The Court also expresses its thanks to the Chief the jeopardy of being sentenced for a second time. In Executive Officer and his staff who, among their its civil jurisdiction the Court needs to be informed of manifold tasks, have freely given of their time to assist appeals which raise urgent questions of law or fact. the judges of the Court whenever required.
3.3. The Registry is so organized as to provide information immediately to the President on these 5. The Court of Appeal in the Country matters. It is divided into two “arms” – the “civil arm” 5.1. In accordance with its practice over the years, and the “criminal arm” under the control of the the Court sat for a week in Ballarat and for the same Registrar and Master Dowling. The staff are dedicated period in Bendigo during the year 2001. For the seven to their tasks and the Court is grateful to them. The years of its existence as a separate Division of the Court is also grateful to its Chief Executive Officer, Mr Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal has regarded its McLean, who worked tirelessly in the years 2000 and “country sittings” of benefit to the citizens of provincial 2001 with Masters Gaffney and Cain to put in place the Victoria and to the local professions. Its “feed-back” Registry structure which now exists. It was necessary has been that the view is reciprocated. that it should be done because it was in that period that the Registry shifted its premises from 436 Lonsdale Street to the “Old High Court” building adjacent to the 5.2. The Court, once again, expresses its thanks Court of Appeal building. It was also necessary to its own staff, to the respective Deputy Prothonotaries because the Registry needed extra staff to cope with and their staff, to the local professions, to the Director the expanding business of the Court. of Public Prosecutions and to the members of the profession from Melbourne. All have contributed to the success of the Court’s initiative of sitting in gazetted 4. circuit districts. The Staff of the Court of Appeal 4.1. The Court of Appeal has its own staff within the Court premises at 459 Lonsdale Street. The premises comprise three floors, with a separate Court 6. The Work of the Court in 2001 room on each floor and accommodation on those 6.1. During the course of the year, the Court – in floors for the President and nine Judges of Appeal and its civil jurisdiction – disposed of 158 appeals whether their respective associates. In addition there are four by hearing, settlement or discontinuance. In its secretaries, six tipstaves and three research assistants. criminal jurisdiction, it disposed of 379 applications for leave to appeal against conviction, conviction and 4.2. The staff have been dedicated to the work of sentence or sentence only. the Court and the judges of the Court are grateful to them. The four secretaries have been with the Court 6.2. In its civil jurisdiction the Court also for the seven years of its existence, as have the entertained applications, which pursuant to the tipstaves and some of the judges’ associates. Each Supreme Court Act and the Rules of Court are made to year the Court provides the opportunity to three law the Court comprising either two judges or a single (honours) graduates (generally on a “career path” from judge. These are applications made on Fridays of the Universities to the profession) to work for the Court each week. as research assistants. The Court has been delighted with the quality of work of these research assistants who, in turn, have received invaluable experience from their association with the Court.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 10
6.3. In its criminal jurisdiction, the Court further Table 3: Civil Applications entertained 17 “Crown appeals” against sentence brought either by the State or Commonwealth Directors of Public Prosecutions; six applications for extension of Nature of Applications Number time for leave to appeal against conviction and/or sentence; 10 applications for bail pending appeal; two Leave to Appeal 73 appeals under the Crimes (Mental Impairment) Act; Extension of Time two cases stated by the County Court; one application 35 for the summoning of a grand jury; one application for Stay of Execution 27 the determination of issues arising under the Appeals Security for Costs Costs Act; and one application to receive fresh 8 evidence pursuant to s.574 of the Crimes Act 1958. Dismissal/Striking Out Notice of Appeal 8 Expedition of Hearing 6 6.4. In tabular form, the following is a profile of Appeal not be taken to be Abandoned appeals disposed of by the Court in its civil and criminal 6 jurisdictions during the year: Directions 4
Sundry 13 Table 1: Civil Division Statistics Quarter by 180 Quarter
Current 1/1/01 1/4/01 1/7/01 1/10/01 Table 4: Criminal Division appeals as at: 176 176 195 178 Number (a) Appeals against conviction or Add: Notices of conviction and sentence: 82 Appeal filed: 36 50 36 47 (169) (during quarter Appeals against sentence 290 commencing): Subtract: Appeals Miscellaneous 7 disposed of: (during quarter Total: 379 commencing): Current 31/3/01 30/6/01 31/9/01 31/12/01 appeals as at: (b) Profile of Activity in List During 2001 176 195 178 187 No. of No. of No. of No. of Appealsin Appeals Appeals Appeals Table 2: Elapsed time averages (in List at filed in 2001 finalized in in list as at 1.1.01 2001 31.12.01 months) 310 319 379 250 Filing 1st 2nd 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Year’s Notice of Quarter Quarter Average Appeal To (c) Elapsed Times of Applications Finalized Final 14.49 11.91 13.72 Disposition 16.21 12.23 during 2001
Final Sentence Conviction & Overall Appeal 12.56 12.82 12.22 11.91 12.39 Sentence Book to Hearing: 7.2 13.8 8.6 months months months
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 11
(d) Profile of s.582 Crimes Act sentence The statistics demonstrate that the majority of applications (single judge) during 2001 applicants are content to accept the decision of the single judge. The procedure, though arduous to the (i) Total number listed 209 staff and the judges of the Court has now been in (ii) Applications granted 57 existence long enough to indicate that, literally, weeks of Court time has been saved by the institution of the (iii) Applications refused 75 procedure. The “screening process” has also revealed (iv) Applications abandoned 41 that more sentence appeals which do get before the (v) Applications adjourned 36 Court are successful; simply because the single judge has found that they have prospects. In keeping with Of the applications refused, 13 elected to proceed to a the previous year about one-third of the sentence hearing before the Court. All but two of those appeals which did come before the Court were applications were refused. allowed. Of the 17 Crown appeals heard by the Court, nine were allowed and eight dismissed. Most of the applications “adjourned” were because of the late grant of legal aid. 7.4. In the criminal division of the Court, the vast majority of appeals come from the County Court. As was the case in the preceding year, of the civil appeals 7. Comments upon the Work of the heard and determined, about half came from the Trial Division and half from the County Court. The Court Court reserved for consideration 55 of the civil appeals which 7.1. It is apparent that the intensity of the work of it heard; and reserved 64 of the appeals which it heard the Court during 2001 was approximately as it had in its criminal jurisdiction. The average time taken for been in the preceding year. At the end of the calendar consideration in the civil jurisdiction was a little over 1.7 year the number of outstanding civil appeals was about months; and in the criminal jurisdiction about 1.3 11 more than was in the list at the beginning of the months. year; whereas the outstanding number of criminal appeals had been reduced by almost 70. There is still 7.5. During the course of the year (2001), the High an unacceptable number of outstanding conviction Court entertained 14 applications for special leave from appeals, but the situation has greatly improved upon decisions of the Court in its criminal jurisdiction, and 14 the position as it stood at the beginning of the year applications from decisions given by the Court in its civil 2001. jurisdiction. All “criminal applications” were refused; two “civil” applications were granted. The appeals 7.2. The “elapsed time averages” for dealing with have not yet been heard. conviction appeals appears high; but those times have been distorted by a small number of appeals where the 7.6. In concluding these comments, it is perhaps applicants have repeatedly applied to have their worth noting that, of the 180 applications made to the applications adjourned for one reason or another. Court in its civil jurisdiction, 73 of them were Within reason, the Court has been prepared to grant applications for leave to appeal. This is an increase of applicants “time indulgences” which they claim. The 50% over and above the applications for leave made in average “elapsed times” in the civil list are in keeping – the preceding year. It is not easy to discern why there although slightly higher – than the preceding year. has been such a large increase in these applications; However, again these times are distorted by but it is to be hoped that it is not becoming a trend. applications on behalf of parties for adjournments.
7.3. As has been reported previously, the “screening process” employed by the Court pursuant to s.582 of the Crimes Act has proved to be successful in reducing the number of frivolous applications for leave to appeal against sentence. It provides the opportunity to a single judge to explain to applicants the difference in function between the trial judge and the Court of Appeal; and to indicate (with reasons) why he is of the opinion that the application has no prospects of success. The procedure is without prejudice to the applicants who are entitled, in any event, to have their application referred to the Court.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 12
PART TWO OF THIS REPORT This part, containing additional statistics for civil and criminal business and the financial statements of the Senior Master will be published later this year.
JUDGES’ ANNUAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDING 31 DECEMBER 2001
PART TWO
28 February 2003
John Landy, A.C., M.B.E. Governor of the State of Victoria and its Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia
Dear Governor
We, the Judges of the Supreme Court of Victoria have the honour to present Part Two of our Report pursuant to the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986 with respect to the year 2001.
Yours sincerely
J. H. Phillips, C.J. John Winneke, P. W. F. Ormiston, J.A. John D. Phillips, J.A. Stephen Charles, J.A. F. H. Callaway, J.A. J. M. Batt, J.A. Peter Buchanan, J.A. Alex Chernov, J.A. F.H.R. Vincent, J.A. Bernard G. Teague, J. P. D. Cummins, J. T. H. Smith, J. David Ashley, J. John Coldrey, J. David Byrne, J. D. L. Harper, J. G. M. Eames, J. H. R. Hansen, J. Philip Mandie, J. Rosemary Balmford, J. E. W. Gillard, J. Murray B. Kellam, J. M. L. Warren, J. Bernard D. Bongiorno, J. D.J. Habersberger, J.
Introduction by the Chief Justice
Form of the Report For this year we have resolved to present our Annual Report in two parts.
Part One Of This Report Part One of the Annual Report has been submitted.
What follows in this document is Part Two of the Annual Report.
Part Two Of This Report This document consists of Part Two of the Annual Report, containing additional statistics for civil and criminal business and the financial statements of the Senior Master.
John Harber Phillips Chief Justice of Victoria
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE i
Supreme Court Registries
Principal Registry Court of Appeal Registry Juries Division
Level 2 Ground Floor Level 1 436 Lonsdale Street 450 Little Bourke Street 436 Lonsdale Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000 MELBOURNE VIC 3000 MELBOURNE VIC 3000 Phone: (03) 9603 9300 Civil Ph: (03) 9603 6031 Phone: (03) 9603 9240 Fax: (03) 9603 9400 Criminal Ph: (03) 9603 6045 Fax: (03) 9603 9250 Ausdoc: DX 210608 Fax: (03) 9603 6050 Ausdoc: DX 210608 Ausdoc: DX 210608
Ballarat Registry Mildura Registry 100 Grenville Street South Deakin Avenue (PO Box 604) (PO Box 5014) BALLARAT VIC 3350 MILDURA VIC 3500 Phone: 5331 2311 Phone: 5023 0519 Fax: 5333 3574 Fax: 5021 1794 Ausdoc: DX 214276 Ausdoc: DX 217506
Bendigo Registry Sale Registry 71 Pall Mall Foster Street (Princes Highway) (PO Box 930) (PO BOX 351) BENDIGO VIC 3550 SALE VIC 3850 Phone: 5440 4140 Phone: 5144 2888 Fax: 5441 4895 Fax: 5144 7954 Ausdoc: DX 214508 Ausdoc: DX 218574
Geelong Registry Shepparton Registry Railway Terrace High Street (PO Box 428) (PO Box 607) GEELONG VIC 3220 SHEPPARTON VIC 3630 Phone: 5225 3333 Phone: 5821 4633 Fax: 5225 3392 Fax: 5821 2374 Ausdoc: DX 216046 Ausdoc: DX 218731
Hamilton Registry Wangaratta Registry Martin Street Faithfull Street (PO Box 422) (PO Box 504) HAMILTON VIC 3300 WANGARATTA VIC 3677 Phone: 5572 2288 Phone: 5721 5066 Fax: 5572 1653 Fax: 5721 5483 Ausdoc: DX 216376 Ausdoc: DX 219436
Horsham Registry Warrnambool Registry Roberts Avenue Cnr Timor and Gillies Streets (PO Box 111) (PO Box 244) HORSHAM VIC 3400 WARRNAMBOOL VIC 3280 Phone: 5382 3344 Phone: 5562 2444 Fax: 5382 1578 Fax: 5561 1403 Ausdoc: DX 216519 Ausdoc: DX 219592
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE ii
Contents Introduction by the Chief Justice...... I Supreme Court Registries - Addresses and Contact Numbers...... II
CHAPTER 1 : NAMES OF JUDGES AND MASTERS 1 CHAPTER 2 : COURT OF APPEAL 3 2.1. The Work of the Court in 2001 ...... 3 CHAPTER 3 : TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL 6 3.1. Civil Jurisdiction ...... 6 3.1.1. Originating Process – Melbourne...... 6 3.1.2. Originating Process - Circuit Registries ...... 7 3.1.3. General Trial List - Melbourne...... 8 3.1.4. Long Cases List...... 11 3.1.5. Listing Information - Circuit...... 13 3.2. Commercial and Equity Division...... 14 3.2.1. Corporations Business ...... 14 3.2.2. Commercial List ...... 15 3.2.3. Building Cases...... 16 3.2.4. Admiralty List...... 16 3.2.5. Intellectual Property List ...... 17 3.2.6. Victorian Taxation Appeals ...... 17 3.3. Common Law Division ...... 17 3.3.1. Major Torts List ...... 17 3.3.2. Valuation, Compensation and Planning List...... 17 CHAPTER 4 : TRIAL DIVISION - CRIMINAL 18 4.1. Criminal Trials – Melbourne...... 18 4.2. Criminal Trials - Circuit...... 18 4.3. Criminal Applications...... 18 CHAPTER 5 : MASTERS 19 5.1. Masters’ Business ...... 19 5.2. Funds in Court – Senior Master’s Accounts - ...... 19 CHAPTER 6 : JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION - SEE PART I 20 CHAPTER 7 : MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION 21 7.1. Court Administration Organisational Chart...... 21 7.2. Chief Executive Officer ...... 22 7.3. Prothonotary and Principal Registrar...... 22 7.4. Registrar of Probates ...... 22 7.5. Sheriff and Juries Commissioner...... 22 7.6. Principal Registry ...... 23 7.6.1. Prothonotary’s Office ...... 24 7.6.2. Probate Office...... 24 7.7. Court of Appeal Registry ...... 25 7.8. Juries Division...... 25 7.9. Judicial employees ...... 25 7.9.1. Associates...... 25 7.9.2. Tipstaves...... 26 7.9.3. Courts’ Information Officer...... 26 7.10. Library...... 27 7.11. Court Network ...... 27
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE iii
CHAPTER 8 : FINANCE AND REVENUE 28 8.1. Financial Statements...... 28 8.1.1. Annual Appropriations/Expenditure...... 28 8.1.2. Revenue - Prothonotary’s Office and Office of the Registrar of Probates ...... 30 8.1.3. Revenue (Court Fees)- Prothonotary’s Office...... 30 8.1.4. Applications to the Prothonotary to waive Court Fees during 2001 ...... 31 8.1.5. Revenue (Court Fees) - Probate Office ...... 31 APPENDIX 1: SENIOR MASTER’S FINANCIAL REPORT 32 GLOSSARY 48
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE iv
CHAPTER 1: : Names of Judges and Masters
CHAPTER 1: NAMES OF JUDGES AND MASTERS
Chief Justice Period of office. The Honourable Justice John Harber Phillips, A.C. (1933- ) 17.12.1991- (*1984)
President of Court of Appeal The Honourable Mr Justice John Spence Winneke, A.O. (1938- ) 07.06.1995-
Judges of Appeal The Honourable Justice Robert Brooking (1930- ) 07.06.1995- (**1977) 07.06.1995 - 30.05.2001- The Honourablle Justice Robert Clive Tadgell (1934) (**1980) The Honourable Mr Justice William Frederick Ormiston (1935- ) 07.06.1995- (**1983) The Honourable Mr Justice John David Phillips (1936- ) 07.06.1995- (**1990) The Honourable Justice Stephen Pendrill Charles (1937- ) 07.06.1995- The Honourable Mr Justice Frank Hortin Callaway (1945- ) 07.06.1995- The Honourable Mr Justice John Michael Batt (1935- ) 06.05.1997- (**1994) The Honourable Justice Peter Buchanan (1943- ) 28.10.1997- The Honourable Justice Alex Chernov (1938- ) 13.10.1998- (**1997) The Honourable Justice Frank Hollis Rivers Vincent (1937- ) 12.06.2001- (**1985)
Judges The Honourable Mr Justice Barry Watson Beach (1931- ) 18.07.1978- The Honourable Justice Bernard George Teague (1938- ) 13.10.1987- The Honourable Justice Philip Damien Cummins (1939- ) 17.02.1988- The Honourable Justice Allan William McDonald (1937- ) 19.05.1988- The Honourable Justice Thomas Harrison Smith (1939- ) 01.05.1990- The Honourable Mr Justice David John Ashley (1942- ) 21.08.1990- The Honourable Justice John Joseph Hedigan (1931- ) 30.01.1991- 30.08.2001 The Honourable Justice John Allen Coldrey (1942- ) 19.02.1991- The Honourable Justice David McCartin Michael Byrne (1940- ) 20.08.1991- The Honourable Justice David Lindsey Harper (1943- ) 11.03.1992- The Honourable Justice Geoffrey Michael Eames (1945- ) 26.05.1992- The Honourable Justice Hartley Roland Hansen (1942- ) 06.04.1994- The Honourable Justice Philip Mandie (1942- ) 10.05.1994- The Honourable Justice Rosemary Anne Balmford (1933- ) 06.03.1996- The Honourable Justice Eugene William Gillard (1939- ) 06.05.1997- The Honourable Justice Murray Bryon Kellam (1946- ) 28.01.1998- The Honourable Justice Marilyn Louise Warren (1950- ) 13.10.1998- The Honourable Justice Bernard Daniel Bongiorno (1943- ) 18.12.2000- The Honourable Justice David John Habersberger (1946-) 03.07.2001- The Honourable Justice Geoffrey Raymond Flatman (1944-) 18-07-2001- The Honourable Justice Gaetano (Tony) Pagone (1955-) 02-10-2001-
Reserve Judges The Honourable Mr Justice Norman Michael O'Bryan (1930- ) 07.05.1992- The Honourable Mr Justice Ian Gray (1926- ) 30.03.1990- 05.03.2001 The Honourable Mr Justice Alec James Southwell (1926- ) 09.09.1997- 30.10.2001 The Honourable Justice Howard Tomaz Nathan (1936- ) 18.04.1997-
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 1
CHAPTER 1: : Names of Judges and Masters
During 2001 the Honourable Mr. Justice O’Bryan sat as a reserve Judge during the periods 20 to 30 August, 3 to 28 September, 5 to 31 October, 1 to 16 November and 1 to 14 December.
The Honourable Justice Nathan sat as a reserve Judge during the periods 2 January to 6 April, 25 June to 13 July and 10 to 21 September 2001.
Masters
Philip Lawrence Cain (1953- ) Registrar of the Court of Appeal 03.04.2001-**1996 Kevin John Mahony (1941- ) Senior Master 15-04-1983-
Thomas Peter Bruce (1934- ) Taxing Master 15.07.1973- Ewan Kenneth Evans (1943- ) 02.08.1983- Charles William George Wheeler (1935- ) 31.07.1990- Kathryn Elizabeth Kings (1951- ) Listing Master 23.03.1993- Michael Joseph Louis Dowling, QC (1937) 15.05.2001-
In May 2001 Master John Bernard Gaffney retired as Registrar of the Court of Appeal and Registrar of Criminal Appeals. Master Cain was appointed to replace him in each capacity.
Mr. Michael Joseph Louis Dowling, QC was appointed a Master of the Court on 15 May 2001.
* Date of first appointment to the Supreme Court. ** Date of first appointment to the Supreme Court. The Court of Appeal commenced on 7June 1995.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 2
CHAPTER 2: : Court of Appeal
CHAPTER 2: COURT OF APPEAL
2.1. The Work of the Court in 2001 During the course of the year, the Court – in its civil jurisdiction – disposed of 158 appeals whether by hearing, settlement or discontinuance. In its criminal jurisdiction, it disposed of 379 applications for leave to appeal against conviction, conviction and sentence or sentence only.
In its civil jurisdiction the Court also entertained applications, which pursuant to the Supreme Court Act and the Rules of Court are made to the Court comprising either two judges or a single judge. These are applications made on Fridays of each week.
In its criminal jurisdiction, the Court further entertained 17 “Crown appeals” against sentence brought either by the State or Commonwealth Directors of Public Prosecutions; six applications for extension of time for leave to appeal against conviction and/or sentence; 10 applications for bail pending appeal; two appeals under the Crimes (Mental Impairment) Act; two cases stated by the County Court; one application for the summoning of a grand jury; one application for the determination of issues arising under the Appeals Costs Act; and one application to receive fresh evidence pursuant to s.574 of the Crimes Act 1958.
In tabular form, the following is a profile of appeals disposed of by the Court in its civil and criminal jurisdictions during the year:
Table 1: Civil Division Statistics Quarter by Quarter 01/01/2001 01/04/2001 01/07/2001 01/10/2001
Current appeals at 176 176 195 178 Notices of Appeal filed during Quarter 36 50 36 47 (169) Appeals disposed of during Quarter 36 31 53 38 (158) Current Appeals at 31/3/01(176) 30/6/01(195) 31/9/01(178) 31/12/01(187)
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 3
CHAPTER 2: : Court of Appeal
Table 2: Elapsed time averages (in months) Average 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter for Year
Filing Notice of Appeal to Final 16.21 12.23 14.49 11.91 13.72 Disposition Filing Appeal Book to Hearing: 12.56 12.82 12.22 11.91 12.39
Table 3: Civil Applications Nature of Applications Number Leave to Appeal 73 Extension of Time 35 Stay of Execution 27 Security for Costs 8 Dismissal/Striking Out Notice of Appeal 8 Expedition of Hearing 6 Appeal not be taken to be Abandoned 6 Directions 4 Sundry 13 Total: 180
Table 4: Criminal Division Nature of Application Filed Number Appeals against conviction or conviction and sentence 82 Appeals against sentence 290 Miscellaneous 7 Total: 379
Table 5: Activity in the List during 2001 Number No. of Appeals in List at 1.1.01 310 No. of Appeals filed in 2001 319 No. of Appeals finalised in 2001 379 No. of Appeals in list as at 31.12.01 250
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 4
CHAPTER 2: : Court of Appeal
Table 6: Elapsed Times of Applications finalised during 2001 Number Sentence 7.2 months Conviction and Sentence 13.8 months Overall 8.6 months
Table 7: Profile of s.582 Crimes Act sentence applications to a single judge during 2001 Number Total number listed 209 Applications granted 57 Applications refused 75 Applications abandoned 41 Applications adjourned 36
Of the applications refused, 13 elected to proceed to a hearing before the Court. All but two of those applications were refused.
Most of the applications “adjourned” were because of the late grant of legal aid.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 5
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
CHAPTER 3: TRIAL DIVISION – CIVIL
3.1. Civil Jurisdiction 3.1.1. Originating Process – Melbourne The following statistics provide comparative historical information relating to the types of proceedings commenced in the court.
The summary in Table 8 is a breakdown of the types of proceedings when first filed in the Court into six major groups.
Writs for Trial by Jury Usually a proceeding relating to personal injury claims and relating to employment or motor car accidents where the plaintiff requires trial by a Judge and jury of six persons (including Major Torts List proceedings).
Writs for Trial by Judge Alone A wide variety of claims such as proceedings relating to large debt claims, default in mortgage payments resulting in sale by mortgagee and actions for possession, claims for relief for breach of contract, proceedings in the Admiralty List, Building Cases List and Intellectual Property List, and personal injury claims where the plaintiff does not require the trial to be before a jury (including Major Torts List proceedings).
Originating Motions Many Acts provide for proceedings to be commenced by originating motion. Among the range of proceedings brought by originating motion are those relating to claims by beneficiaries or other persons for further provision from deceased estates, applications to remove caveats from property titles or to remove or modify restrictive covenants.
Corporations Proceedings relating specifically to relief sought under the Corporations Law which include applications to wind-up companies that are insolvent, to set aside statutory demands served on companies that owe money or to have directors of companies that have gone into liquidation publicly examined.
Commercial List Proceedings that arise out of ordinary commercial transactions including any proceeding relating to insurance, banking or finance and in which there is a question that has importance in trade or commerce. This list is Judge controlled. While proceedings can be either filed directly into this List or be subsequently admitted by order of a Judge, the figure in Table 8 is of proceedings that were filed directly into the List.
Miscellaneous Other process types filed in the Court not included above, being special applications required by legislation that are not able to be categorised by registry staff at the time of filing. Also included are enforcement proceedings from the Magistrates’ Court, appeals/reviews from the Magistrates’ Court, County Court and Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal on questions of law to the Trial Division (includes proceedings in the Valuation, Compensation & Planning List and Victorian Taxation Appeals) and transfers from Federal Courts and other State Courts.
The increase in processes filed this year over last year of approximately 14 per cent appears to be in corporations and writs for trial by jury. It should be noted that the proceedings are categorised usually under the first or principal relief claimed which may or may not be the principal or substantive head of relief sought (on the claim or counterclaim) at the time the proceeding is ready for trial (see Table 8).
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 6
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 8: Summary of originating process filed *CEQ *CLD Total 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 Writs for trial by jury 0 0 **542 193 542 193 Writs for trial by judge alone 1478 1457 510 390 1988 1847 Originating motions 407 418 162 112 569 530 Corporations 1206 1034 0 0 1206 1034 Commercial List 118 122 0 0 118 122 Miscellaneous*** 38 72 480 521 518 593 Total 3247 3103 1694 1216 4941 4319
* The above term CEQ stands for ‘Commercial and Equity Division’ and the term CLD stands for ‘Common Law Division’. Divisions were introduced on 1 January 2000. (Practice Note 4 of 1999)
** CLD increase is due to 335 DVT (Deep Vein Thrombosis) proceedings filed.
*** This figure includes enforcement proceedings, appeals/reviews, and proceedings transferred to the Court.
3.1.2. Originating Process - Circuit Registries
Table 9: Originating process filed at each circuit registry during 2001 CEQ CLD Total 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 Ballarat 8 12 8 10 16 22 Bendigo 7 0 4 15 11 15 Geelong 23 8 12 7 35 15 Hamilton 0 2 0 0 0 2 Horsham 2 0 0 1 2 1 Mildura 7 1 17 17 24 18 Sale 2 2 7 6 9 8 Shepparton 5 0 13 4 18 4 Wangaratta 5 0 5 2 10 2 Warrnambool 2 5 25 24 27 29 Total 61 30 91 86 152 116
Table 10: Originating process filed at circuit registries during 2000 CEQ CLD Total 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 Writs for trial by jury 0 0 47 23 47 23 Writs for trial by judge alone 48 20 27 44 75 64 Originating motions 12 10 9 3 21 13 Miscellaneous 1 0 8 16 9 16 Total 61 30 91 86 152 116
The summary of information in Table 10 does not include Corporations or Commercial List proceedings as all of these proceeding are filed in Melbourne. The main reason for this is that these Lists involve mainly companies, banks and the tax office, which have their main offices in Melbourne.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 7
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Figure 1: The following chart illustrates the comparative totals of originating process filed at Melbourne and at circuit registries
5093
4297 4435
CEQ 3308 CEQ 3133
CLD CLD 1785 1302
1999 2000 2001
3.1.3. General Trial List - Melbourne The principal trial list of the Court at Melbourne is called the Civil List. Proceedings are entered into this List when the Listing Master of the Court is satisfied that they are ready to be heard. This is a new system. It was adopted by the Court in June. It reflects the greater degree of management of proceedings by the Court and means that proceedings are only placed in the list when the Court is satisfied that a proceeding is ready for trial. Previously, it was the responsibility of the parties solicitors to advise the Court that the proceeding was ready for trial.
The new practice has provided a more accurate picture of the business awaiting trial before the Court. This is best reflected in Table 11 by the number of cases entered or re-instated for 2001 being 506and for 2000 being 525, and by the number of cases pending at 31 December 2001 being 426 and at 31 December 2000 being 383.
The Court’s benchmark is that 80 per cent of proceedings will be given a date for trial within three months of being deemed by the Court to be ready for trial; see Practice Note No. 3 of 1995.
Table 11: Activity in the List during 2001 CEQ CLD 2001 2000
No. in list at 1.1.01 212 171 383 486 No. entered or reinstated 223 283 506 525 No. removed from list 4 1 5 4 Known no. disposed 193 261 454 586 Known no. disposed of during previous year but noted during 2 2 4 38* 2001 No. pending in list at 31.12.01 236 190 426 383
* The relatively high number of dispositions noted this year resulted from an audit of files conducted by the Prothonotary during the last quarter of 2000.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 8
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 12: Types of case pending in the Civil List at 31 December 2001 Jury and P.I. CEQ CLD 2001 2000 Jury: P.I. * (Motor Vehicle) 0 4 4 2 Jury: P.I. (Industrial) 0 18 18 17 Jury: P.I. (Other) 0 9 9 8 Judge Alone: P.I. (Motor Vehicle) 0 4 4 4 Judge Alone: P.I. (Industrial) 0 1 1 0 Judge Alone: P.I. (Other) 0 8 8 10 Jury: non- P.I. (Defamation etc) 0 7 7 13 Sub-Total : 0 51 51 54 Judge Alone
Damages 43 38 81 68 Debt 25 5 30 34 Declaration 47 23 70 64 Corporations 8 0 8 4 Probate 65 0 65 45 Appeals/Reviews 0 43 43 31 Possession 13 2 15 15 Building cases 3 0 3 3 Other 32 28 60 65 Sub-Total : 236 139 375 329 Total: 236 190 426 383
* The term ‘P.I.’ in the above Table means claims for damages arising out of personal injury.
Table 13: Mode of known dispositions during 2001 CEQ CLD 2001 Overall 2000 Overall
Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial 123 129 252 330 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced 19 33 52 54 Tried to judgment 47 99 146 196 Transferred to County, Magistrates' or Federal Courts 4 0 4 6 Total 193 261 454 586
Elapsed times/age of proceedings disposed in 2001
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 9
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 14: Date of commencement to date of disposition 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 18.6 13.4 16.6 13.4 75 percentile 30.5 23.8 26.8 28.0 90 percentile 45.7 43.3 44.9 51.6 Mean 24.6 19.6 21.7 21.4
Table 15: Date of entry into Civil List to date of disposition 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 7.3 4.9 6.0 5.7 75 percentile 11.4 7.4 9.6 9.7 90 percentile 17.6 15.0 16.2 18.9 Mean 9.4 7.0 8.0 8.6
Elapsed times/age of proceedings pending at 31 December 2001
Table 16: Date of commencement to date of entry into List 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 12.0 11.0 11.7 11.9 75 percentile 22.7 19.1 20.4 21.4 90 percentile 36.9 29.9 33.8 42.5 Mean 17.3 14.9 16.2 18.2
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 10
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 17: Date of entry into List to 31 December 2001 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 6.9 4.7 6.3 5.2 75 percentile 13.4 10.3 12.8 12.2 90 percentile 23.5 19.9 22.7 22.9 Mean 10.4 8.6 9.6 8.6
3.1.4. Long Cases List The Long Cases List is managed by the Listing Master.
The Long Cases List is made up of civil proceedings where the parties have advised the Court that the trial will exceed 12 sitting days duration and the Listing Master has exercised her discretion to enter the proceeding in the List. Such proceedings are given a specified trial date usually six to 12 months in the future. The long lead time is due in part to the time required to prepare for trial and in part due to the heavy commitments of the Court. Often the Court timetable does not have the capacity to accommodate a trial of the length of that for which a trial date is sought.
Table 18: Activity in the List during 2001 CEQ CLD 2001 2000 No. in list at 1.1.01 23 19 42 92 No. entered or reinstated 20 10 30 14 No. removed from list 0 0 0 0 Known no. disposed 14 12 26 44 Known no. disposed of during previous year but noted during 2000* 0 1 1 20 No. pending in list at 31.12.01 29 16 45 42
* The relatively high number of dispositions noted this year resulted from an audit of files conducted by the Prothonotary during the last quarter of 2000.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 11
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 19: Mode of known dispositions during 2001 CEQ CLD 2001 2000 Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial 10 9 19 24 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced 0 0 0 6 Tried to judgment 4 3 7 14 Transferred to County, Magistrates' or Federal Courts 0 0 0 0 Total 14 12 26 44
Elapsed times/age of proceedings disposed in 2001
Table 20: Date of commencement to date of disposition
2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 69.8 35.3 55.5 48.8 75 percentile 91.9 47.1 71.5 62.2 90 percentile 95.6 52.6 93.5 77.9 Mean 75.8 40.4 59.5 55.3
Table 21: Date of entry into List to date of disposition 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 31.6 16.3 21.5 22.5 75 percentile 40.4 18.4 34.3 34.5 90 percentile 44.0 34.3 45.0 46.2 Mean 35.0 16.4 26.4 25.8
Elapsed times/age of proceedings pending at 31 December 2001
Table 22: Date of commencement to date of entry into List
2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 21.1 21.8 21.7 28.1 75 percentile 34.7 28.7 33.8 36.7 90 percentile 62.9 33.8 54.8 62.9 Mean 27.7 21.9 25.6 31.4
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 12
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Table 23: Date of entry into List to 31 December 2001 2001 2001 Overall 2000 Overall months months months CEQ CLD Median 7.0 17.2 9.0 15.8 75 percentile 15.3 27.4 19.7 26.5 90 percentile 28.2 35.8 28.7 39.5 Mean 11.7 19.7 14.5 20.6
3.1.5. Listing Information - Circuit
Table 24: Activity at each circuit Registry during 2001 Place No. in List at 1.01.01 No. entered No. Disposed No. pending at 31.12.01 JA JJ JA JJ JA JJ JA JJ CEQ CLD CLD CEQ CLD CLD CEQ CLD CLD CEQ CLD CLD Ballarat - - - 2 1 - - 1 - 2 - - Bendigo - - - 1 - - - - - 1 - - Geelong - - - 1 - 1 - - - 1 - 1 Hamilton ------Horsham - - - - - 1 - - - - - 1 Mildura - - - - 5 2 - 3 1 - 2 1 Sale - 1 - - - 1 - - - - 1 1 Shepparton - - - 1 4 - - - - 1 4 - Wangaratta - - - - 2 4 - 1 - - 1 4 Warrnambool - - 10 - - 15 - - 18 - - 7 Total 0 1 10 5 12 24 0 5 19 5 8 15
Note: The letters ‘JA’ and ‘JJ’ in the Table signify those cases to be heard before a Judge Alone and before a Judge & Jury.
Table 25: Mode of known dispositions during 2001 CEQ CLD 2001 2000 Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial 0 2 2 33 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced 0 19 19 14 Tried to judgment 0 3 3 7 Transferred to County, Magistrates' or Federal Courts 0 0 0 0 Total 0 24 24 54
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 13
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
3.2. Commercial and Equity Division
3.2.1. Corporations Business
Table 26: Activity during 2001 To wind up Leave to Reinstate Set aside Other Relief Total company proceed to Register Statutory Demand No. Pending at 1.1.01 126 9 15 43 92 285 Proceedings filed during 2001 795 36 53 172 150 1206 Known no. disposed 808 28 53 178 168 1235 Known disposals from previous years* 10 5 11 14 *19 59 No. Pending at 31.12.01 103 12 4 23 55 197
* Included in the disposition figures are 15 cases (other relief) deemed finalised because they had been adjourned to a date to be fixed longer than 1 year.
Table 27: Mode of known dispositions during 2001 Type of Application Granted Dismissed Struck out Discontinued No. referred Adjourned to the Civil Sine Die List To wind-up company 502 12 5 287 2 0 Leave to proceed 23 5 0 0 0 0 To Reinstate to Register 47 2 0 4 0 0 Set aside Statutory 113 22 4 39 0 0 Demand Other Relief 103 15 7 20 8 15 Total 788 56 16 350 10 15
Elapsed times/age of proceedings disposed for the Year 2001:
Table 28: Date of commencement to date of disposition 2001 2000 months months Median 1.5 1.4 75 Percentile 2.1 2.1 90 Percentile 3.3 3.5 Mean 2.2 2.2
Table 29: Case types pending at 31.12.01 2001 2000 To wind-up company 103 126 Leave to proceed 12 9 To Reinstate to register 4 15 Set aside statutory demand 23 43 Other case types 55 93 Total 197 285
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 14
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Elapsed times/age of proceedings pending at 31 December 2001
Table 30: Date of entry to 31 December 2001 2001 2000 months months Median 1.1 1.5 75 Percentile 2.9 3.6 90 Percentile 9.5 9.4 Mean 3.5 3.6
3.2.2. Commercial List
Table 31: Activity in the list during 2001 2001 2000 No. in list at 1.1.01 117 116 No. entered into list* 131 140 No. removed from list 46 32 Known no. disposed of 105 99 Known No. disposed of during previous year but noted during 3 8 2001 No. in list at 31.12.01 94 117
* Includes 13(18) proceedings admitted to the list by order.
Table 32: Mode of known dispositions during 2001 2001 2000 Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial 75 79 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced 2 8 Tried to judgment 26 8 Judgment in default of Appearance or Defence 1 2 Judgment under Rule 21.04 or Order 22 1 2 Total 105 99
Elapsed times/age of proceedings disposed during the year 2001.
The table below shows that of the 105 dispositions in the year 2001, 72 (68.6%) were within12 months of the date of entry to the List. The number and rate for the same period in 2000 was 80 (80.8%)
Table 33: Date of entry to date of disposition No. of 0-1 1-3 3-6 6-9 9-12 12-18 18-24 24+ months No. 2 15 24 14 17 13 11 9 % 1.9 14.3 22.9 13.3 16.2 12.4 10.5 8.5
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 15
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
Elapsed times/age of proceedings pending at 31 December 2001.
The table below shows that of the 94 cases pending at 31 December 2001, 17 (18%) have been in the List for the period of 12 months or more since the date of entry. The number and rate for the same period in 2000 was 38 (32.4%).
Table 34: Age of proceedings pending in the List at 31 December 2001
No. of 0-1 1-3 3-6 6-9 9-12 12-18 18+ months No. 12 24 21 15 5 7 10 % 12.8 25.5 22.3 16.0 5.3 7.4 10.6
3.2.3. Building Cases
Table 35: Activity in the List during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 44 31 No. entered into list 36 33 No. disposed of 26 17 No. set down for trial during the year 13 3 Pending at 31.12.01 41 44
3.2.4. Admiralty List
Table 36: Activity in the List during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 10 19 No. entered into list 2 3 No. disposed of 7 12 No. referred to Listing Master for trial 0 1 Pending at 31.12.01 5 10
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 16
CHAPTER 3: : Trial Division – Civil
3.2.5. Intellectual Property List These cases are managed and if possible tried by the Judge in charge
Table 37: Activity in the List during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 4 7 No. entered into list 2 2 No. disposed of 5 5 Pending at 31.12.01 1 4
3.2.6. Victorian Taxation Appeals These cases are managed and if possible tried by the Judge in charge
Table 38: Activity in the List during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 4 3 No. entered into list 17 4 No. disposed of 12 3 Pending at 31.12.01 9 4
3.3. Common Law Division 3.3.1. Major Torts List Proceedings within this list are managed but not necessarily tried by the Judge in charge
Table 39: Activity in the Listing during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 75* 156 No. entered into list 63 76 No. disposed or referred to Listing Master 67 15 Pending at 31.12.01 71 217
S This figure has been adjusted as a result of an exhaustive audit of the files conducted by the Prothonotary during the Fourth Quarter of 2001.
3.3.2. Valuation, Compensation and Planning List Proceedings within this list continue to be managed and where possible tried by the Judge in charge
Table 40: Activity in the Listing during 2001 2001 2000 Pending at 1.1.01 19 11 No. entered into list 17 23 No. disposed or referred to Listing Master 24 15 Pending at 31.12.01 12 19
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 17
CHAPTER 4: : Trial Division - Criminal
CHAPTER 4: TRIAL DIVISION - CRIMINAL
4.1. Criminal Trials – Melbourne
Table 41: Summary of criminal trials at Melbourne 2001 2000 Trials 48 45 Pleas of guilty 46 33 Total 94 78
The Court’s benchmarks are as follows:
S The median elapsed time from the date of committal to the date of disposition is fixed at nine months. S The 90th percentile elapsed time from the date of committal to the date of disposition is fixed at 12 months. S Subject to the provisions of s.353(2) and (3) of the Crimes Act 1958 and the Crimes (Procedure) Regulations 1994, all cases (100 per cent) will be finalised within 12 months from the date of committal.
Notwithstanding the benchmarks set, it is inevitable that some cases cannot be finalised within the time standards. Decisions relating to the granting of legal aid, the availability of witnesses and forensic material, related trials and appeals are all issues which may impact upon the Court’s ability to meet its standards.
4.2. Criminal Trials - Circuit
Table 42: Summary of criminal trials at circuit 2001 2000 Trials 13 4 Pleas of guilty 2 0 Total 15 4
4.3. Criminal Applications
Table 43: Summary of criminal applications 2001 2000 Applications filed under the Bail Act 1977 72 64 Applications filed under the Listening Devices Act 120 127 Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 – 0 2 S.35 Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997- 4 9 Other Other Criminal applications filed* 12 16 Total 208 218
* Figures include applications for witness protection, proceeds of crime, confiscation of profits, extension of time for filing presentment, change of venue of trial and extension of time for commencing rape trials.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 18
CHAPTER 5: : Masters
CHAPTER 5: MASTERS
5.1. Masters’ Business
Table 44: Masters’ Business 2001 2000 General applications 5883 3910 Applications concerning cases awaiting callover dates 2452 2959 Litigation Support Group applications 2880 3247 Taxing applications 938 1027 Funds in Court orders** 4471 4447 Total 18625 15590
* Statistics are not kept of applications which do not result in orders. Most applications are made informally
5.2. Funds in Court – Senior Master’s Accounts - The Senior Master’s financial report is contained in Appendix 1.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 19
CHAPTER 6: : Judicial administration - see part i
CHAPTER 6: JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION - SEE PART I
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 20
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
CHAPTER 7: MANAGEMENT AND ADMINISTRATION
7.1. Court Administration Organisational Chart
Chief Executive Officer
Registry Judicial Support Office Manager Manager Corporate Prothonotary Juries and Registrar of Staff Funds in Court of Services Commissioner Principal Probates (Excluding Court Appeal Manager Associates and Registrar Registry Tipstaves)
Building and Human Budget/ Information Services Resources Finance Technology
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 21
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
7.2. Chief Executive Officer Mr Bruce McLean is the Chief Executive Officer of the Court. The Chief Executive Officer is appointed under section 106 of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and is responsible to the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal for the day to day administration of the Court. He is the senior officer of the Court and is responsible for the general oversight of all non-judicial staff.
The portfolios falling directly under the supervision of the Chief Executive Officer are strategic and business planning, human resource management, financial management, information technology and management of works and services (including the Court’s five buildings).
7.3. Prothonotary and Principal Registrar Mr Joseph Saltalamacchia is the Prothonotary/Principal Registrar of the Court. He is responsible for the administration of the principal registry and all aspects of proceedings and appeals coming within the jurisdiction of the Court.
He has statutory and quasi-judicial obligations and responsibilities for the making of consent orders; the collection, collation and preparation of statistics and reports on behalf of the Court; the secure custody and safekeeping of Court records; collecting and accounting for all fees received by the Court; dealing with applications to waive court fees and dealing with subpoenas as detailed in 7.6.1. below. In the course of his duties, the Prothonotary is often called upon to provide assistance to litigants in person wishing to commence proceedings on their own behalf or appearing before the Court. He is available to assist with after hours calls for urgent applications.
7.4. Registrar of Probates Mr Michael Halpin is the Registrar of Probates. The Registrar is responsible for the processing of all common form grants of representation of deceased estates in Victoria. He is also responsible for the secure custody of all testamentary records and wills deposited with him for safekeeping. In addition the Registrar provides assistance to applicants who wish to obtain probate or administration in small estate matters.
7.5. Sheriff and Juries Commissioner Mr Chris Humphries is the Sheriff of the Court and Mr John Artup is the Deputy Sheriff (Juries) until 1 August 2001. Mr. Joseph Saltalamacchia was appointed as Acting Juries Commissioner when the new Juries Act 2000 commenced. The Sheriff’s duties include the enforcement of writs and warrants in civil matters and in some criminal matters. The Deputy Sheriff (Juries) was, and from 1 August 2001 the Juries Commissioner, is responsible for the administration of the juries system and, on a day to day basis, the provision and supervision of jurors for civil and criminal trials in the Supreme and County Courts.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 22
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
7.6. Principal Registry The Principal Registry of the Court comprises the Prothonotary’s office and the Probate office. The Principal Registry provides services to the judiciary, legal profession and members of the public. There are 10 circuit Courts with registry services at Ballarat, Bendigo, Geelong, Hamilton, Horsham, Mildura, Sale, Shepparton, Wangaratta and Warrnambool. The registries at these Courts are multi-jurisdictional and include also the Magistrates’ Court, County Court and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. During August the acting Senior Deputy Prothonotary, Mr. Patrick Cummins visited all regional Supreme Court registries to consult with Deputy Prothonotaries about relevant and topical issues which they face, and to advise them in relation to new practices and procedures. The visit would also provide an opportunity for local solicitors to meet with the Senior Deputy Prothonotary to discuss Supreme court practices and procedures, and to address any concerns they may have relating to the operation of the Court, practices and procedures, and to address any concerns they may have relating to the operation of the Court, particularly at circuit courts. To that end all local practitioners at the various Courts were advised of the Senior Deputy Prothonotary’s visit and invited to speak to him if they wished. In November, the Prothonotary met with the Deputy Prothonotaries of circuit Courts to discuss practice, procedural issues and issues raised with Pat during his visit in August.
The year 2001 was very busy for the principal registry in a number of different areas, particularly information technology, as change is constant. Following the purchase of an SQL server, the file tracking system was replaced and major enhancements were made to the trial listing system and work commenced on building a computer database to assist with the preparation of the Court’s Annual report to the Productivity Commission (COAG).
The great work of the staff of the Chief Executive Officer; in particular the information technology manager Andy Smout, and his team, and the Prothonotary’s staff - in particular Vivienne Thompson and John Bennett - is acknowledged and appreciated.
Work continued on upgrading other information technology facilities for the registry such as the development and implementation of templates to facilitate the preparation of documentation associated with Small Estate applications, and further changes to the file tracking and trial listing systems, to allow for the introduction of the new Divisional structure in the Trial Division.
Registry staff were actively involved in a number of activities and committees during the year, such as delivering lectures to practitioners and their staff, and to banking institutions, and secondary school and postgraduate students. Staff also participated in Senior Citizens Week, Law Week, the Royal Melbourne Show.
A number of registry staff are members of Court committees, including the Business Excellence Committee. In 1999, the Court conducted a self-assessment in accordance with the Australian Quality Council’s Business Excellence Framework. The Business Excellence Committee is responsible for implementing the recommendations arising out of that assessment.
This year as part of its commitment to community involvement and continuous improvement the Supreme court participated in the Australian Quality Council’s (AQC) ‘E’ Team program.
Over a period of one week five students from Mentone Girls Secondary College, under the guidance of the Court’s Business Excellence facilitator Nicole Morris, applied improvement tools and methodologies to a current process in use within the Registry.
The team toured the Court’s many buildings and met with the Honourable Justice Harper and his staff. As part of the data gathering process the students visited the Public Records Office in North Melbourne and interviewed Court personnel and clients.
On their final day the team gave a presentation detailing their recommendations for improvement to the process to Court staff and school officials.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 23
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
In this thank you speech, the Supreme Court’s Chief Executive Officer, Bruce McLean paid tribute to the team’s initiative and insight throughout their placement. In recognition of their efforts each student was presented with a Certificate of Appreciation bearing a seal of the Court.
A representative from the Australian Quality Control also commended the efforts of the team in analysing a complex process in a short time.
The Supreme Court is the first Court in Victoria to participate in the program and is looking forward to being involved again next year.
7.6.1. Prothonotary’s Office
Since 21 February 1998 an aspect of the work of the Prothonotary has been to manage the process provided by the rules, which allows parties to a civil proceeding to subpoena and inspect documents from a person or entity, whether or not a party to the proceeding, before trial.
Such documents are produced to the Prothonotary and may be inspected in the principal registry provided there is no objection to their production and/or inspection. In cases where objections are taken, the Prothonotary may refer the objections to the Court constituted by a Judge or Master for determination.
The procedure has proved popular with the profession and has reduced the possible incidence of delay that might occur at the trial of a proceeding, when a witness served with a subpoena to produce documents objects to the production or to the subpoena itself. Regrettably, because of the finite and inadequate level of human and physical resources available to the Prothonotary, the procedure has added to the workload of the office and the Court’s storage difficulties. These concerns identified in last years report are still to be addressed.
Table 45: Subpoenas before the Prothonotary during 2001 2001 2000 No. of subpoenas filed 506 262 No. of objections received 59 39 No. of objections dealt with by the Court 41 38 No of inspections held 196 92 Applications to remove documents from Prothonotary’s custody - - Granted 3 3 - Refused 9 1
7.6.2. Probate Office During the year 15,269 Orders granting representation were made. In matters at first instance where requisitions were not raised the time between the date of filing an application and approval was three working days. In addition, the time taken from approval to issue was two working days. The total elapsed time of five working days for processing applications filed in proper form has been maintained for a number of years and compares favourably with interstate jurisdictions, especially in view of the volume of applications filed and the available resources.
The following Table (46) details the type of grants of representation lodged in the probate registry for the years 1997 - 2001 inclusive.
The majority (approximately 90 per cent) of applications are processed and granted within five working days of lodgement.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 24
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
Table 46: Grants of Representation Grants of Representation 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Probate 13,619 12,890 13,062 12,882 13,508 Letters of Administration 1,037 1,009 991 1,059 1082 Letters of Administration CTA (ie with the Will annexed) 322 312 316 320 329 Reseals of foreign grants 75 93 124 144 160 Other* 270 248 261 197 190 Total 15,323 14,552 14,754 14,602 15,269
* This category includes unadministered estates, elections to administer, application by the State Trustees under section 79 Administration and Probate Act 1958 and applications for limited grants - eg. ad litem, ad colligenda bona, pendete lite, etc.
7.7. Court of Appeal Registry The Court of Appeal registry is responsible for the processing of all criminal and civil appeals and applications for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal. There is reference to the number of appeals in Chapter 2.
The registry was restructured during 2000 with the addition of four new staff, including the creation of the position of Registry Manager. In June 2001, Mr. Robert Schade was appointed to the position. A review of registry’s office procedures took place early in the year resulting in the streamlining of office practices. The layout of the office area in the Old High Court building has been re-configured to allow for a more productive work area and to accommodate the extra staff. This has led to improved service to the judiciary and Court users.
7.8. Juries Division As a result of input of significant time and expertise by both IT staff of the Chief Executive Officer and this office, in particular Mr. Jim Johnston, a new computer system for the Juries Division was developed and introduced on 1 August 2001, to coincide with the commencement of the new Juries Act 2000. Staff have also been involved in the planning for the jury pool room and administrative offices for the Juries Division in the new County Court building expected to open in May 2002.
7.9. Judicial employees 7.9.1. Associates An associate is an officer of the Court who assists the Judge or Master by whom he or she is employed. There are presently 32 Judges’ Associates and six Masters’ Associates. Many Associates are legally qualified or hold qualifications in other disciplines. The duties of Judges’ Associates will differ in some respects to those performed by Masters’ Associates because of the differences in the work performed by Judges and Masters. However, there are certain duties that all Associates may be called upon to perform depending on the jurisdiction in which their Judge or Master sits and the type of case to be heard.
The principal functions of an Associate are to prepare and maintain paperwork connected with the performance of the Judge or Master of his or her functions, to schedule and co-ordinate interlocutory hearings and in the case of Judges’ Associates to liaise with the Listing Master regarding trial dates, to sit in court with the Judge or Master, and to liaise with other sections of the Court, the profession and the public. Masters’ Associates have to perform some of the duties undertaken by Tipstaves, while Judges’ Associates may need to perform such duties in the absence of the Tipstaff. Associates work closely with the Judge or Master as personal assistant and researcher. The Associate must be appropriately accessible to practitioners and the public while at the same time maintaining the Judges’ confidentiality. The work performed by the Judges and Masters of the Supreme Court is often highly technical and complex, involving huge numbers of documents and months of pre-trial management both in specialist lists and generally. Associates are required to exercise commensurate skills in document management and administration and are expected to be computer literate.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 25
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
The Associate to the Judge sitting in the Practice Court is required to be on call 24 hours a day. Judges’ Associates must also attend the Judge on circuit, arraign prisoners, empanel juries and take their verdicts. They are required to accept and maintain the proper custody of all exhibits tendered during the course of the trial. They also preside at hearings where evidence is given by deposition. Some Judges’ Associates perform legal research, assist the Judge by discussing legal arguments, summarising evidence and authorities, and by helping with drafting and proof reading judgments. The detail of the duties performed by individual Associates will vary.
7.9.2. Tipstaves
The position of Tipstaff in the Courts of law has its origin in the 14th century. The official of those times was responsible for apprehending persons who had defied the orders of the Court and subsequently delivering them into custody. These duties required travel throughout the countryside.
The role of Tipstaff has evolved through the years and today in the Supreme Court of Victoria they are no longer involved in duties of that type. Now their role incorporates a wide range of tasks reflecting the changing requirements of the Courts and also their Judges.
Today the primary duty of the Tipstaff is to act as a personal and confidential attendant to the particular Judge to whom he or she is appointed and he or she will carry out these tasks in accordance with the Judge’s directions. Generally the duties of the Tipstaff involve two areas - Court work and chambers work. In Court, Tipstaves have key duties concerning witnesses and jurors and in chambers they maintain the Judges’ library and attend to a range of other needs.
One of the more significant changes to the Tipstaff’s duties in recent times has resulted from the introduction of new technology in court proceedings. The regular use of these systems in the criminal Courts and some civil Courts has meant that Tipstaves undergo specific training. The fact that these new systems are only located in some Courts means they are not used regularly by all Tipstaves. Consequently training will be an ongoing requirement.
7.9.3. Courts’ Information Officer This position was created in 1993 to support the flow of public information from the precinct of the Courts (Supreme Court, County Court, Magistrates’ Court and latterly the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal) to the media. Ms Prue Innes, an experienced journalist, has held the position since its inception.
The role requires an experienced eye and ear as to press and media interest in the business of the Courts and a sensitivity to the administration of justice and the protocols of the various Courts. In this capacity, Ms Innes routinely deals with members of the media and judiciary in ensuring that the information interests of the media do not conflict with judicial process. This has resulted in an improved flow of information to the press with respect to matters such as suppression orders, Judges’ sentencing remarks, and the like, and a Judge’s approval for reporters to use small tape recorders in court in the interest of reporting accuracy.
The Courts’ Information Officer also contributes to improving the education of the media with respect to the Courts by conducting periodic seminars for journalists on the pitfalls of court reporting; contempt of court issues; the special considerations to be applied to jury trials and the various statutory limitations on reporting. Attendees have included cadet journalists, journalism students from RMIT and specialist groups such as television reporters and producers and business reporters who have no experience of court reporting.
In the result there has been a considerable improvement in the flow of information and understanding between the Courts and the media which has operated to minimise the risk of disruption to the judicial process by the inadvertent publication of prejudicial material.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 26
CHAPTER 7: : Management and administration
7.10. Library The Supreme Court Library provides information and reference services to the judiciary, court staff and the legal profession.
In 2000, the Library implemented a new online catalogue and database system available to users via an internet front end which was updated during the year and has proven to be popular. The library has also continued to provide the Court’s webpage.
In the near future, it is expected to commence a project of scanning the collection of unreported judgments which will be linked to index records on the database and be available via the network electronically.
Admissions income rose significantly and money from court fees continued to be received. But even with these additional funds, the increase in subscription costs and the problems with exchange rate have placed the library’s budget in a difficult position.
7.11. Court Network Court Network, a volunteer organisation, although not formally a unit of the Court, performs valuable support service to members of the public who attend the Court. The organisation has services in the Supreme Court and other State Courts and Federal Courts.
Court Network’s service model is the provision of support, information and referrals to a court user irrespective of their role in the proceeding before the Court. Court Networkers do not give legal advice but assist people to understand the process and procedures in which they are involved. Additional support and information is provided through Court Network’s telephone information and referral service prior to or after a court appearance.
Funding from the State and the Commonwealth, and Court Network’s own fund raising activities, maintain the Statewide service providing in excess of 50,000 contacts annually.
In the Supreme Court in Melbourne, Court Network has three programs. The first is the generic service of support, information and referral to people attending a trial, an appeal or for any other process. People are frequently referred to Court Network for this support by other agencies, court personnel, police or counsel. Court Network has an ‘outreach’ model and people are approached and assistance offered.
The second program is the provision of volunteers at the information desk each morning for two-three hours. This program which commenced in February 1999, now assists on average 40-50 people each morning to locate the right court, building, personnel, library, jury pool or other similar requests. The enquiries are many and varied and often the person seeking the information is taken to the appropriate place rather than being merely directed.
The third program, which has been in existence for over twelve years, is the education program primarily for VCE Legal Studies students. In the period January–December 2000, the number of students and other interested people who participated in this program was approximately 6,000. This program is run in conjunction with the education liaison officer at the Law Institute of Victoria and is managed and staffed by Court Network.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 27
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
CHAPTER 8: FINANCE AND REVENUE
8.1. Financial Statements 8.1.1. Annual Appropriations/Expenditure (Court of Appeal, Trial Division and Juries Division) Tables 47, 48 and 49 provide a summary of the allocations of money made on behalf of the Government to the Supreme Court and the expenditure by it in respect of the financial year ended 30 June 2001. Certain words and phrases used in the said tables have the following meanings:
“Special Appropriations” means, in relation to
(a) the Court of Appeal Division and the Trial Division, the funds provided by Government from the Consolidated Fund to meet the costs of judicial salaries and related allowances and expenses; and
(b) the Juries Division, the funds provided by Government from the Consolidated Fund to meet the costs of providing “workers compensation payments” to juries for medical and like expenses resulting from jury service.
“Recurrent” means the annual “single line” appropriations provided by Government through the Department of Justice to meet the costs of staff salaries and related expenses and operational costs. The CEO and the Finance Manager apportion the “single line” appropriation between the two recurrent items of “Salaries and related expenses” and “Operations”.
“Non-Discretionary” means those monies provided annually by the Government through the Department of Justice to meet any revenue or expense item the purpose of which is fixed by Government and may not be reallocated by the Court for any other purpose except with the explicit approval of the Department of Treasury and Finance. Thus, these monies are provided for “protected” items such as property rental costs, accrued long service leave payments, capital assets charges, and the like.
“Revenue Retention Monies” means those funds described in paragraph 8.1.2 (b).
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 28
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Table 47: Court of Appeal Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001 2000-2001 2000-2001 Allocation Expenditure $’000 $’000 Special Appropriations Judicial salaries, allowances and related expenses 3,270 3,048 (notional)
Recurrent Staff salaries, allowances and related expenses 1,507 1,375 Operating 347 486
Non-Discretionary 590 453 Total: 5,714 5,362
Table 48: Trial Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001 2000-2001 2000-2001 Allocation Expenditure $’000 $’000 Special Appropriations Judicial salaries, allowances and related expenses 6,330 7,276 (notional)
Recurrent Staff salaries, allowances and related expenses 4,777 4,668 Operating 1,180 1,342
Non-Discretionary 3,139 5,095 Revenue Retention Monies (for both the Court of Appeal 1,052 875 and Trial Divisions) Grant - Supreme Court Library 376 376 Carry-over from 1999-2000 100 100 Capital (for both the Court of Appeal and Trial Divisions) 455 470 Roof Refurbishment Project (Budget carry-over from 1998- 204 204 1999 Total: 17,613 20,406
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 29
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Table 49: Juries Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001 2000-2001 2000-2001 Allocation Expenditure $’000 $’000 Special Appropriations Juror Workers Compensation 17 1 (notional)
Recurrent Staff salaries, allowances and related expenses 465 574 Operating 530 406 Juror Payments 2,644 2,648 Non-Discretionary 18 48 Total: 3,674 3,677
8.1.2. Revenue - Prothonotary’s Office and Office of the Registrar of Probates (a) Pursuant to the Supreme Court (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations (S.R. No. 141 of 1998), the Prothonotary and the Registrar of Probates receive monies paid in the form of cash or cheque in respect of documents filed with the Court and other transactions prescribed by the Regulations. The amount of the fees payable under the Regulations is determined by Government.
(b) The monies referred to in the preceding paragraph are paid by the Prothonotary and the Registrar of Probates into a bank account operated in the name of the Department of Justice and the Court does not retain any of such monies for its own use. Similarly, the County Court and the Magistrates’ Court also pay the Court fees received by them into the Department of Justice account. The money so collected on behalf of the Government is known as “the Revenue Pool”. A proportion of that Revenue Pool is allocated by the Government amongst the three Courts in proportions and for purposes approved by the Attorney-General. In the 2000-2001 financial year this Court received $1.052 million by way of Retention monies. It should be noted that the Department of Justice provided the further sum of $0.53 million from the Revenue Pool to meet the recurrent expenditure of the Court of Appeal. That lastmentioned amount forms part of the “Recurrent” funds shown in Table 48.
8.1.3. Revenue (Court Fees)- Prothonotary’s Office
Table 50: Comparative Cumulative Totals Received During the Calendar Years: 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
$5,173,807 $5,669,501 $5,382,063 $5,563,640* $6,567,179*
* This figure does not include the Supreme Court Library Levy imposed pursuant to the Supreme Court (Fees) (Further Amendment) Regulations 2000 (S.R. No. 41/2000) effective from 1 July 2000.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 30
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
8.1.4. Applications to the Prothonotary to waive Court Fees during 2001
Table 51: Summary of Applications received during 2001 No. of applications made No. of applications granted Value of applications No. of applications refused granted
100 95 $82,953.00 5
8.1.5. Revenue (Court Fees) - Probate Office
Table 52: Comparative Cumulative Totals Received During the Calendar Years: 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001
$2,911,877 $2,950,034 $3,067,989 3,192,064* 3,371,744*
* This figure does not include the Supreme Court Library Levy imposed pursuant to the Supreme Court (Fees) (Further Amendment) Regulations 2000 (S.R. No. 41/2000) effective from 1 July 2000.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 31
Appendix 1: Senior Master’s Financial Report
Appendix 1: Senior Master’s Financial Report
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 32
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 33
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 34
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Senior Master of the Supreme Court
Special Purpose Financial Report For the year ended 30 June 2001
In our opinion the accompanying Special Purpose Financial Report, comprising Statement of Financial Performance, Statement of Financial Position and Notes to the Financial Statements for Common Fund No 1, Common Fund No 2, Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account and Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account present fairly the financial transactions of the accounts of the Senior Master of the Supreme Court for the year ended 30 June 2001 and the financial position as of that date.
At the date of signing the Special Purpose Financial Report we were not aware of any circumstances that would render any particulars included in the statements misleading or inaccurate.
K J MAHONY J HARTIGAN Senior Master Manager, Senior Master’s (Funds in Court) Office
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 35
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Comprising:
Statement of Financial Performance and Statement of Financial Position together with Notes to and forming part of the Special Purpose Financial Report for:
Common Fund No 1
Common Fund No 2
Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account
Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 36
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Guarantee and Investments Held on Separate No 1 No 2 Reserve Account Account Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ INVESTMENT REVENUE
Interest Revenue (excluding Bank Bills) 1(c),2 137,727 129,355 23,197,403 19,845,815 2,490,775 2,904,864 - - Bank Bill Interest 2 - - 1,994,606 1,103,331 214,745 59,217 - - Dividend Income 1(d) ------2,725,436 2,254,932 Annuity Income 1(d) ------770,599 661,116 Interest Rebate 3 - - - - 1,124,017 1,128,377 - - Gains on Disposal of Investments 4(a) - - - - 6,971,086 1,285,021 - - Other Income - - - - - 1,618 - - Total Investment Revenue 137,727 129,355 25,192,009 20,949,146 10,800,623 5,379,097 3,496,035 2,916,048
EXPENSES
Interest Expense (Purchase of Investments) - - 6,923,850 1,113,800 460,070 330,790 - - Interest Paid on Closed Accounts 14,648 24,600 398,624 226,136 - - - - Dividend Transfer 1(d) ------2,725,436 2,254,932 Annuity Transfer 1(d) ------770,599 661,116 Interest Rebate 3 46,259 29,866 1,077,758 1,098,511 - - - - Loss on Disposal of Investments 4(b) - - - - 5,735,120 548,541 - - Bank Bill Interest 4(c) - - - - 1,994,606 1,103,331 - - Depreciation Expense 1(i) - - - - 74,718 73,622 - - Administration Expenses 6,6(a) - - - - 2,326,353 1,938,316 , , Correction of fundamental error 6(a) - - - - 131,836 - - - Total Expenses 60,907 54,466 8,400,232 2,438,447 10,722,703 3,994,600 3,496,035 2,916,048
Funds Available as a Result of Operations 1(h) 76,820 74,889 16,791,777 18,510,699 77,920 1,384,497 - - Comprised of: Transferred to General Reserve 14 - - - - 77,920 1,384,497 - - Distribution to Beneficiaries 1 June 80,341 72,661 19,679,675 17,653,463 - - - - Less: Prior Year Unallocated Funds (11,705) (9,477) (4,114,464) (3,257,228) - - - - Add: Current Year Unallocated Funds 8,184 11,705 1,226,566 4,114,464 - - - - 76,820 74,889 16,791,777 18,510,699 77,920 1,384,497 - -
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 37 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Guarantee Investments Held on Separate No 1 No 2 and Reserve Account Account Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ CURRENT ASSETS Cash 2,119,975 2,378,003 5,870,504 9,502,694 668,722 596,952 - - Interest Receivable 7 - - 714,041 3,623,982 270,307 492,289 - - Annuity Income Receivable 7 ------32,837 27,263 Prepayments -- - -8,311 9,894 - - Debtors -- - -11,640 - - - Investments on Common Account 8 - - 74,155,852 24,749,040 8,943,251 6,295,405 - -
NON CURRENT ASSETS Investments on Common Account 8 - - 247,963,150 270,379,050 25,427,930 27,620,444 - - Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate 9,9(a) ------61,568,457 52,899,588 Account Fixed Assets 10 - - - - 106,685 134,521 ------Total Assets 2,119,975 2,378,003 328,703,547 308,254,766 35,436,846 35,149,505 61,601,294 52,926,851
CURRENT LIABILITIES Creditors and Accruals 11 - - 2,785 2,276 298,959 89,538 - - Annuity Income Payable to Beneficiaries 7 ------32,837 27,263 Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund 12 2,111,791 2,366,298 6,994,844 9,102,505 - - - - Interest income unallocated 1(h) 8,184 11,705 1,226,566 4,114,464 - - - -
NON CURRENT LIABILITIES Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate 9,9(a) ------61,568,457 52,899,588 Account Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund 12 - - 320,479,352 295,035,521 - - - -
Total Liabilities 2,119,975 2,378,003 328,703,547 308,254,766 298,959 89,538 61,601,294 52,926,851
Net Assets - - - - 35,137,887 35,059,967 - -
RESERVES Statutory Reserve 13 - - - - 3,308,235 3,106,327 - - General Reserve 14 - - - - 31,829,652 31,953,640 - -
Total Reserves - - - - 35,137,887 35,059,967 - -
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 38 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
1. Summary of significant accounting policies
The principal accounting policies adopted in preparing the special purpose financial report are stated to assist in a general understanding of these accounts.
This is a special purpose financial report that has been prepared in accordance with Australian Accounting Standards and other mandatory reporting requirements with the exception of the disclosure requirements in the following:
S AAS 16 Financial Reporting by Segments S AAS 28 Statement of Cash Flows S AAS 22 Related Party Disclosures S AAS 33 Presentation and Disclosure of Financial Instruments
The special purpose financial report has been prepared on the basis of historical costs and does not take into account changing money values or, except where stated, current valuations of non-current assets.
(a) Nature and purpose of the Common Funds
Common Fund No 1 The prime objective of Common Fund No 1 is to provide a secure return on liquid investments for the benefit of the beneficiaries.
The Fund consists of: money held in dispute matters; money held as security for costs; and other payments made into court under the provisions of the Trustee and other Acts.
Common Fund No 2 The prime objective of Common Fund No 2 is to provide the maximum return achievable subject to acceptable risk criteria through investment in approved securities.
The Fund consists of damages awarded and payments pursuant to compromise to persons deemed incapable of managing their own affairs due to disability, dependent minors and minors having sustained personal injury with entitlement to payment out at age 18.
Guarantee and Reserve Account The purpose of the Guarantee and Reserve Account is: C the provision of a statutory reserve of 1% of the value of the Common Funds under the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986; C the provision for and payment of the administrative expenses of the Senior Master's Office; C the smoothing of the annual crediting rate of interest paid to beneficiaries of the Common Funds; and C the provision for and payment of other expenses incurred by the Common Funds as considered appropriate by the Senior Master. Losses made on the sale or realisation of Common Fund investments are reimbursed from this account.
The Guarantee and Reserve Account derives income from investments made from the Account and from net gains on sale or realisation of investments in Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2.
Investments Held on Separate Account With a view to providing a measure of capital growth, a hedge against inflation, and to offset taxation liability, it is appropriate for part of the assets of certain beneficiaries to be invested outside Common Fund No 2.
Investments outside Common Fund No. 2 are presently limited to Australian Equities and Indexed Annuities. Portfolios are regularly reviewed so as to suit the needs and circumstances of individual beneficiaries.
Investments held on separate account are registered in the name of the Senior Master of the Supreme Court but in a manner which specifically identifies the individual upon whose behalf the investment is held.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 39
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
(b) Basis of Accounting
The accounts have been prepared on an accruals basis and are recorded at historical cost.
(c) Revenue
For Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2, revenue is defined as income earned from investment activities of the funds accounted for on an accruals basis. It includes interest from fixed interest securities and any transfers of interest from the Guarantee and Reserve Account to the Common Funds.
For the Guarantee and Reserve Account, revenue also includes gains on sale or realisation of investments made by Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 which are required to be transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account.
(d) Investments
Investments are brought to account at cost with related income being recognised in the Operating Statement. Income includes interest and capital gains as well as accrued interest.
Capital gains/(losses), defined as proceeds from sale or realisation of investments, less purchase cost, are transferred to/from the Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account.
Investments on Common Account comprise government, semi-government securities and bonds, prime corporate or bank securities, and bank bills.
Beneficiaries' Investments – Held on Separate Account (Note 9) comprising annuities and equities, are made directly on the individual beneficiary's account and income arising therefrom (ie dividends and annuity income) is credited directly to the individual beneficiary’s accounts in Common Fund No. 2. Annuities purchased are amortised in equal instalments over the period of the annuity contract.
(e) Salary Costs
The Senior Master of the Supreme Court is not an employer of staff. Salaries and wages are however, reimbursed by the Senior Master to the Department of Justice and respective agencies as appropriate.
(f) Segment Information
The accounts are prepared on a segmented basis to show the financial position of each of the Common Funds, the Guarantee and Reserve Account, and the Beneficiaries Investments - Held on Separate Account.
(g) Comparative Figures
Where necessary, comparative figures have been expanded to conform to current year disclosures.
(h) Funds Available as a Result of Operations
Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects the net income (accounted for on an accruals basis) earned by each of the Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 as a result of investment activities. This net income is then distributed during the year primarily via the 1 June income distribution process. The net income includes interest rebates transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account and interest subsidies, as required, transferred from the Guarantee and Reserve Account to the Common Funds.
At 1 June each year, distributions are made from Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 to the respective beneficiaries. This is initiated by the declaration of respective interest rates by the Senior Master.
At 30 June each year there are Unallocated Funds that consist of net investment income (ie interest) earned and either received or receivable during June. This amount is shown as a current liability in the Statement of Financial Position indicating that the funds will be distributed in some form during the following twelve months. These funds will not be allocated to beneficiaries until the following 1 June (although some distributions may be made during the year as a result of beneficiaries leaving the fund). Consequently, the Funds Available as a Result of Operations is shown as comprising:
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 40
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
C the annual distributions made to beneficiaries at the rate declared by the Senior Master on 1 June each year based on the net interest balance (cash basis) at 31 May. This balance is the result of cash movements for the year 1 June to 31 May. C the net interest revenue received and receivable from 1 June to 30 June.
Due to the timing differences (ie 1 June income distribution year vs 30 June financial year) the prior year and current year Unallocated Funds are reflected in the Funds Available as a Result of Operations reconciliation.
Guarantee and Reserve Account The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects all investment and operating revenues and expenses.
(i) Depreciation of Computer and Office Equipment
Depreciation is calculated on a straight line basis to write off the net cost of each item of computer and office equipment over its expected life. Estimates of remaining useful lives are made on a regular basis for all assets. The expected useful lives are as follows: C Computer Equipment 3 years C Office Equipment 4 years
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 41
CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held on No 1 No 2 Guarantee and Reserve Separate Account Account Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 6(a) Correction of Fundamental Error (continued) (Restated) (Restated) 6(a)(i)RESTATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE:
INVESTMENT REVENUE
Interest Revenue (excluding Bank Bills) 1(c),2 137,727 129,355 23,197,403 19,845,815 2,490,775 2,904,864 - - Bank Bill Interest 2,4(c) - - 1,994,606 1,103,331 214,745 59,217 - - Dividend Income 1(d) ------2,725,4362,254,932 Annuity Income 1(d) ------770,599661,116 Interest Rebate 3 - - - - 1,124,017 1,128,377 - - Gains on Disposal of Investments 4(a) - - - - 6,971,086 1,285,021 - - Other Income - - - - - 1,618 - - Total Investment Revenue 137,727 129,355 25,192,009 20,949,146 10,800,623 5,379,097 3,496,035 2,916,048
EXPENSES
Interest Expense (Purchase of Investments) - - 6,923,850 1,113,800 460,070 330,790 - - Interest Paid on Closed Accounts 1(g) 14,648 24,600 398,624 226,136 ---- Dividend Transfer 1(d) ------2,725,4362,254,932 Annuity Transfer 1(d) ------770,599661,116 Interest Rebate 3 46,25929,866 1,077,7581,098,511---- Loss on Disposal of Investments 4(b) - - - - 5,735,120 548,541 - - Bank Bill Interest 4(c) - - - - 1,994,606 1,103,331 - - Depreciation Expense 1(i) - - - - 74,718 73,622 - - Administration Expenses 6 - - - - 2,326,353 2,070,152 - - Total Expenses 60,907 54,466 8,400,232 2,438,447 10,590,867 4,126,436 3,496,035 2,916,048
Funds Available as a Result of Operations 1(h) 76,820 74,889 16,791,777 18,510,699 209,756 1,252,661 - -
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 42 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Guarantee and Investments Held on Separate No 1 No 2 Reserve Account Account 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 6(a) Correction of Fundamental Error (continued) $ $ (Restated) (Restated) 6(a)(ii) RESTATEMENT OF ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES Salaries and wages (Note 1 (e)) 1,639,686 1,431,328 Consultants fees 438,448 425,485 Audit fees 24,500 18,000 Computer and office equipment 83,320 78,587 Stationery and office supplies 23,999 24,699 Bank charges 6,976 5,705 Other general expenses 109,424 86,348 Total Administrative Expenses 2,326,353 2,070,152
(Restated) (Restated) 6(b) RESTATEMENT OF GENERAL RESERVE
Previously reported General Reserve: end of previous financial year 31,953,640 30,855,038 Correction of fundamental error (131,836) - Restated General Reserve: beginning of financial year 31,821,804 30,855,038 Less Transfer to Statutory Reserve (201,908) (285,895) 31,619,896 30,569,143 Restated net result 209,756 1,252,661 Restated General Reserve: end of financial year 31,829,652 31,821,804
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 43 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Guarantee and Investments Held on Separate No 1 No 2 Reserve Account Account 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000 2001 2000
7. INTEREST RECEIVABLE
Fixed Interest Securities - - 714,041 3,623,982 270,307 492,289 - - Annuities ------32,837 27,263 Total Interest Receivable - - 714,041 3,623,982 270,307 492,289 32,837 27,263
8. INVESTMENTS ON COMMON ACCOUNT
Bank Bills - - 74,155,852 24,749,040 4,945,941 2,975,575 - - Bonds - - 247,963,150 270,379,050 29,425,240 30,940,274 - - Total Investments on Common Account - - 322,119,002 295,128,090 34,371,181 33,915,849 - -
Comprised of: Current (matures < 1 year) - - 74,155,852 24,749,040 8,943,251 6,295,405 - - Non Current (matures > 1 year) - - 247,963,150 270,379,050 25,427,930 27,620,444 - - - - 322,119,002 295,128,090 34,371,181 33,915,849 - -
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 44 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Equities Annuities Total $ $ $
9. BENEFICIARIES’ INVESTMENTS HELD ON SEPARATE ACCOUNT
A corresponding liability is booked to reflect the Senior Master’s responsibility for management of beneficiaries’ funds. These investments do not form part of the Common Fund (Note 1(a)).
Opening balance at 1 July 40,458,193 12,441,395 52,899,588 Adjustment relating to realisation of net capital gains from previous years 2,467,913 - 2,467,913 Investments purchased during the year 13,928,135 - 13,928,135 Investments disposed of during the year (8,158,962) - (8,158,962) 48,695,279 12,441,395 61,136,674 Shares received in lieu of dividends 1,274,074 - 1,274,074 Amortisation of annuity in current year - (842,291) (842,291)
Closing balance at 30 June 49,969,353 11,599,104 61,568,457
9(a) Initial Recognition of Equities Capital Gains (Losses) – Fundamental Error
During 2000/01, a comprehensive reconciliation of Equities (held on behalf of beneficiaries) revealed that the accounts did not recognise capital gains (losses) at the time packages of Equities were sold. Non Current Assets and Non Current Liabilities were both understated by $2,467,913 at 30 June 2000. The error has been adjusted as a fundamental error as at 30 June 2001 in accordance with Australian Accounting Standard AAS 36 “Statement of Financial Position”.
The fundamental error does not impact on Net Assets or Reserves as the adjustment to the Non Current Assets – Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account is equally offset by Non Current Liabilities – Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account.
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 45 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Funds Guarantee Investments Held on Separate Common Fund No. 1 Common Fund No. 2 and Reserve Account Account 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 10. FIXED ASSETS
Computer Equipment - - - - 264,067 220,536 - - Less: Accumulated Depreciation - - - - (174,815) (107,430) - - Computer Equipment Written Down Value - - - - 89,252 113,106 - -
Office Equipment - - - - 35,395 33,569 - - Less: Accumulated Depreciation - - - - (17,962) (12,154) - - Office Equipment Written Down Value - - - - 17,433 21,415 - -
Total Fixed Assets Written Down Value - - - - 106,685 134,521 - -
11. CREDITORS AND ACCRUALS
Salaries and wages - - - - 270,110 56,356 - - Consultancy - - - -3,790 12,229 - - Audit fees - - - - 24,500 18,000 - - Other - - 2,785 2,276 559 2,953 - - Total Creditors and Accruals - - 2,785 2,276 298,959 89,538 - -
12. AMOUNTS OWING TO BENEFICIARIES
Current (payable < 1 year) 2,111,791 2,366,298 6,994,844 9,102,505 - - - - Non Current (payable > 1 year) - - 320,479,352 295,035,521 - - 61,568,457 52,926,851 Total Amounts Owing to Beneficiaries 2,111,791 2,366,298 327,474,196 304,138,026 - - 61,568,457 52,926,851
13. STATUTORY RESERVE
The Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account maintains a Statutory Reserve at 1% of the Common Funds pursuant to S113(20) of the Supreme Court Act.
Opening balance at 1 July - - - - 3,106,327 2,820,432 - - Add: Transfer from General Reserve (Note 14) - - - - 201,908 285,895 - - Closing Balance at 30 June - - - - 3,308,235 3,106,327 - -
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 46 CHAPTER 8: : Finance and Revenue
Common Funds Guarantee Investments Held on Separate Common Fund No. 1 Common Fund No. 2 and Reserve Account Account 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 30 June 2001 30 June 2000 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 14. GENERAL RESERVE
Equity in the assets of the Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account is shown as a General Reserve against potential capital losses on realisation of Common Fund investments and to supplement interest distributions to Common Fund beneficiaries pursuant to S113(20) of the Supreme Court Act.
Opening balance at 1 July - - - - 31,953,640 30,855,038 - - Less: Transferred to Statutory Reserve (Note 13) - - - - (201,908) (285,895) - - 31,751,732 30,569,143 - - Add: Surplus of Guarantee and Reserve Account - - - - 77,920 1,384,497 - - Closing balance at 30 June - - - - 31,829,652 31,953,640 - -
15. SUBSEQUENT EVENTS Investment markets are subject to volatility. The terrorist attacks on the United States of America of 11 September 2001 have exacerbated this volatility and caused significant falls in the value of Australian and global equities. The Senior Master only invests in equities that are issued from within the top fifty listed companies, according to market capitalisation. Between balance date (30 June 2001) and the signing of these Financial Statements, there has been no adverse impact on these equity investments.
As a matter of course, the Senior Master will continue to monitor market conditions in association with his investment advisers. The Senior Master has adopted a long term strategic planning horizon in the formulation of his investment objectives, and these objectives recognise the volatility in investment markets.
The accompanying notes form an integral part of this special purpose financial report. Page 47 Glossary
Glossary
The glossary includes definitions of words or abbreviations used within this Annual Report.
Affidavit Written statement in the name of a person, called the deponent, by whom it is voluntarily signed and sworn to or affirmed.
Associate Each Judge and Master has an Associate. The Associate’s duties involve the administrative functions connected with the running of Court hearings. They also act as general assistants to their Judge/Master. Judges’ Associates wear robes in Court.
CEO The Chief Executive Officer is an officer of the Court and is employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 1998. The Chief Executive Officer is responsible for the overall administration of the Court and oversees all the various work areas in the Court, with the exception of those which report directly to the judiciary.
Circuit Sittings of the Supreme Court which are held in various regional districts within Victoria other than Melbourne.
Civil List List of civil proceedings awaiting trial before a Judge sitting with or without a jury.
Commercial List The Commercial List is a Judge-controlled list, designed to provide speedy resolution of commercial disputes.
Court of Appeal Supreme Court when constituted by two or more Judges. Usually, it is three. It is possible to have more than one Court of Appeal sitting at a time.
Department Department of Justice.
Mean The mean, commonly known as the arithmetic average, is computed by adding all the scores in the distribution and dividing by the number of scores.
Median The median is a measure of central tendency. It is the score that divides a distribution exactly in half. Exactly one half of the scores are less than or equal to the median, and exactly one half are greater than or equal to the median. Because exactly 50% of the scores fall at or below the median, this value is equivalent to the 50th percentile.
Parens Patriae Parent or Protector of the People.
Pending A case that is awaiting final determination.
Percentile The rank or percentile rank of a particular score is defined as the percentage of individuals in the distribution with scores at or below that particular value. For example, 75th percentile means that 75% of the scores in the distribution are at or below this value. The 90th percentile means that 90% of the scores in the distribution are at or below this value.
Practice Court A Court where short and/or urgent applications can be made.
Presentment A document filed in the Court which describes the crimes alleged by the prosecution to have been committed by a defendant. Used by the State Office of Public Prosecutions.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 48
Glossary
Probate Proving a Will. It is the Supreme Court’s authority that a Will is valid, allowing the executor to collect the deceased’s assets and so administer the estate according to the terms of the Will.
Prothonotary The Prothonotary is an officer of the Court and is employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 1998. The Prothonotary is also the Principal Registrar of the Supreme Court. He reports to the Chief Executive Officer.
Registrar of Probates The Registrar is an officer of the Court and is employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 1998. He reports to the Chief Executive Officer.
Sheriff The Sheriff is an officer of the Court and is employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 1998.
Subpoena Writ or Summons issued in a proceeding requiring the person to whom it is directed to be present at a particular place and time for a specified purpose under a penalty for non- attendance.
Warrant An authority under hand and seal of the Court directed to some officer to arrest an offender or recover property.
Writ Document under the seal of the Court commanding the person to whom it is addressed to do or forbear from doing some act. In the Supreme Court, most proceedings are commenced by Writ.
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 49
Tables:
Table 1: Civil Division Statistics Quarter by Quarter...... 3 Table 2: Elapsed time averages (in months)...... 4 Table 3: Civil Applications...... 4 Table 4: Criminal Division...... 4 Table 5: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 4 Table 6: Elapsed Times of Applications finalised during 2001...... 5 Table 7: Profile of s.582 Crimes Act sentence applications to a single judge during 2001 ...... 5 Table 8: Summary of originating process filed...... 7 Table 9: Originating process filed at each circuit registry during 2001...... 7 Table 10: Originating process filed at circuit registries during 2000...... 7 Table 11: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 8 Table 12: Types of case pending in the Civil List at 31 December 2001...... 9 Table 13: Mode of known dispositions during 2001...... 9 Table 14: Date of commencement to date of disposition ...... 10 Table 15: Date of entry into Civil List to date of disposition...... 10 Table 16: Date of commencement to date of entry into List ...... 10 Table 17: Date of entry into List to 31 December 2001...... 11 Table 18: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 11 Table 19: Mode of known dispositions during 2001...... 12 Table 20: Date of commencement to date of disposition ...... 12 Table 21: Date of entry into List to date of disposition...... 12 Table 22: Date of commencement to date of entry into List ...... 12 Table 23: Date of entry into List to 31 December 2001...... 13 Table 24: Activity at each circuit Registry during 2001 ...... 13 Table 25: Mode of known dispositions during 2001...... 13 Table 26: Activity during 2001...... 14 Table 27: Mode of known dispositions during 2001...... 14 Table 28: Date of commencement to date of disposition ...... 14 Table 29: Case types pending at 31.12.01...... 14 Table 30: Date of entry to 31 December 2001...... 15 Table 31: Activity in the list during 2001 ...... 15 Table 32: Mode of known dispositions during 2001...... 15 Table 33: Date of entry to date of disposition...... 15 Table 34: Age of proceedings pending in the List at 31 December 2001 ...... 16 Table 35: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 16 Table 36: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 16 Table 37: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 17 Table 38: Activity in the List during 2001 ...... 17 Table 39: Activity in the Listing during 2001...... 17 Table 40: Activity in the Listing during 2001...... 17 Table 41: Summary of criminal trials at Melbourne...... 18 Table 42: Summary of criminal trials at circuit...... 18 Table 43: Summary of criminal applications...... 18 Table 44: Masters’ Business...... 19 Table 45: Subpoenas before the Prothonotary during 2001 ...... 24 Table 46: Grants of Representation...... 25 Table 47: Court of Appeal Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001 ...... 29 Table 48: Trial Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001...... 29 Table 49: Juries Division - Financial Year Ended 30 June 2001 ...... 30 Table 50: Comparative Cumulative Totals Received During the Calendar Years:...... 30 Table 51: Summary of Applications received during 2001...... 31 Table 52: Comparative Cumulative Totals Received During the Calendar Years:...... 31
ANNUAL REPORT 2001 PAGE 50