SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA SUPREME COURT
JUDGES’ ANNUAL REPORT 2002–04
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Annual Report CONTENTS LETTER TO THE GOVERNOR
Court Profile 1 To His Excellency Year at a Glance 2 The Honourable John Landy, AC, MBE Report of the Chief Justice 3 Governor of the State of Victoria and its Chief Executive Officer’s Review 7 Dependencies in the Commonwealth of Australia Court of Appeal 10 Dear Governor Trial Division: Civil 13 We, the Judges of the Supreme Court of Victoria have the honour to present our Annual Report Trial Division: Commercial and Equity 18 pursuant to the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986 with respect to the financial years of Trial Division: Common Law 22 1 July 2002 to 30 June 2003 and 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004, including a transitional 18-month Trial Division: Criminal 24 Judges’ Report, reflecting the change in reporting period from calendar year to financial year. Masters 26 Funds in Court 29 Court Governance 31 Yours sincerely Judicial Organisational Chart 33 Judicial Administration 34 Court Management 36 Service Delivery 37 The Victorian Jury System 40 Marilyn L Warren The Court’s People 42 Chief Justice of Victoria Community Access 43 10 May 2005 Finance Report 2002–03 and 2003–04 45 Senior Master’s Special Purpose Financial Report for the John Winneke, P P D Cummins, J D J Habersberger, J Year Ended 30 June 2003 50 W F Ormiston, J A T H Smith, J R S Osborn, J Senior Master’s Special Purpose Stephen Charles, J A David Ashley, J J A Dodds-Streeton, J Financial Report for the F H Callaway, J A John Coldrey, J R F Redlich, J Year Ended 30 June 2004 63 J M Batt, J A David Byrne, J K M Williams, J Appendices Peter Buchanan, J A D L Harper, J Stuart Morris, J Names of Judges and Masters 79 Alex Chernov, J A H R Hansen, J S Kaye, J Supreme Court Registries 80 F H R Vincent, J A Philip Mandie, J S Whelan, J Committee Activities 81 G M Eames, J A E W Gillard, J E Hollingworth, J Glossary of Terms 82 G A A Nettle, J A Murray B Kellam, J Freedom of Information and Website 84 Bernard G Teague, J Bernard D Bongiorno, J COURT PROFILE
ABOUT THE COURT Constitutionally, the Supreme Court of Victoria (the Court) is the superior court in the State of Victoria. It is equal in status to, but independent of, the Legislature and the Executive Government. For practical purposes, it has unlimited jurisdiction in both civil and criminal proceedings. The Court is constituted by 32 Judges, two active Reserve Judges and seven Masters. It operates in two statutory divisions – the Court of Appeal and the Trial Division – supported by 188 administrative staff.
COURT STRUCTURE The Court is divided into the Court of Appeal and the Trial Division. The Court of Appeal was established under the Constitution (Court of Appeal) Act 1994 and proclaimed to commence on 7 June 1995. The Court of Appeal is a Division of the Supreme Court ands comprises the Chief Justice, the President and nine Judges of Appeal, plus any additional Judges of Appeal appointed or acting under section 80B of the Constitution Act 1975. The Court of Appeal hears appeals from criminal and civil trials heard by Judges of the Supreme Court and the County Court. It also hears appeals from proceedings that have come before the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and other tribunals. Court procedure is governed by Acts of Parliament, Rules of Court and Practice Statements. Some Appeals require Leave of a Judge or Leave of the Court of Appeal before a Notice of Appeal can be filed. The Trial Division comprises the Chief Justice and 21 Trial Judges. Masters assist the Judges in discharging the Civil work of the Trial Division. The Trial Division is divided into three divisions: • Commercial and Equity Division • Common Law Division • Criminal Division When each case commences, it is placed into one of these divisions. A Principal Judge heads each division and manages the work of the division in addition to his or her judicial duties. The types of cases heard and determined by the Trial Division include: • all cases of treason, murder, attempted murder and other major criminal matters; • civil cases involving complex and significant legal issues; • civil cases involving large claims, generally exceeding $200,000; • some appeals and reviews of decisions of subordinate courts and tribunals; and • various other cases, such as applications for bail, winding up of companies, probate business and urgent applications for injunctions.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 1 YEAR AT A GLANCE
Six months to • NEW CHIEF Item 2003–04 30 June 2003 JUSTICE Court of Appeal • Criminal Appeals Filed 362 180 • Civil Appeals Filed 166 54 • NEW CHIEF Trial Division: Civil EXECUTIVE • Proceedings Filed (Melbourne) 6,041 2,549 OFFICER • Proceedings Filed (Regional Registries) 188 54 General Trial List: Melbourne • Proceedings Entered or Reinstated 573 261 • ANNOUNCED A • Proceedings Finalised 528 239 CHANGE IN • Proceedings Pending 488 463 Long Cases List REPORTING • Proceedings Entered or Reinstated 33 13 PERIOD • Proceedings Finalised 29 12 • Proceedings Pending 56 53 All Regional Courts • DEVELOPED AND • Cases Entered 14 10 IMPLEMENTED • Cases Finalised 32 8 • Cases Pending 5 23 STATEWIDE THE Trial Division: Commercial and Equity Division JURY Corporations List INFORMATION • Proceedings Entered 1,265 550 MANAGEMENT • Proceedings Finalised 1,225 521 • Proceedings Pending 252 212 SYSTEM (JIMS) Commercial List TO IMPROVE THE • Proceedings Entered 125 50 • Proceedings Finalised 88 30 ADMINISTRATIVE • Proceedings Pending 88 60 PROCESSES Building Cases List ASSOCIATED • Proceedings Entered 11 15 • Proceedings Finalised 4 14 WITH JURY • Proceedings Pending 42 36 MANAGEMENT Admiralty List • Proceedings Entered 1 5 • Proceedings Finalised 2 3 • RE-LAUNCHED • Proceedings Pending 6 7 THE COURT’S Intellectual Property List WEBSITE WITH • Proceedings Entered 5 5 • Proceedings Finalised 8 - SUBSTANTIALLY • Proceedings Pending 6 9 INCREASED Victorian Taxation Appeals List • Proceedings Entered 28 3 AND UPDATED • Proceedings Finalised 10 3 INFORMATION • Proceedings Pending 27 9 Trial Division: Common Law Division • CIVIL CASES Major Torts List • Proceedings Entered 51 290 LODGED WITH THE • Proceedings Finalised or Referred to Listing Master 47 85 COURT INCREASED • Proceedings Pending 637 633 Valuation, Compensation and Planning List BY 17.6% • Proceedings Entered 19 9 • Proceedings Finalised or Referred to Listing Master 7 5 • Proceedings Pending 24 12 Trial Division: Criminal • Criminal Trials (Melbourne) 95 45 • Criminal Trials (Circuit) 9 6 • Criminal Applications Filed 214 104 Note: For the first time, this Annual Report presents statistics in a financial year format. Comparisons with previous financial years will be presented in future Annual Reports.
2 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Chief Justice of Victoria Marilyn Warren.
REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE
OVERVIEW The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has also declared the Victorian Supreme and County courts as the nation’s best performers in clearing criminal This annual report is my first as Chief Justice. cases – despite the 15 per cent increase in the lodgement of civil matters. Due to the shift in the reporting period from the calendar year to the financial Notwithstanding these increased workloads, the Productivity Commission revealed year-end, it covers the 18-month period from 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004. That that the Supreme Court managed to clear a far higher proportion of its pending time was an extraordinarily busy one for the Court, and I thank all judges, masters cases in 2003-2004 compared with the previous year, up from 67.5 per cent to 83.9 and judicial staff who helped make it such a success. per cent. However, the workload of the Court and its capacity to manage will require There is still, however, a great deal of work to be done. Programs and strate- constant review. gies implemented for the future of the Supreme Court during this period are ongo- ing. These include the upgrading of technology services to fit the Court’s 21st cen- THE COURT AND THE tury needs and the return of high-profile, complex litigation in both the criminal COMMUNITY and civil jurisdictions. We all continue to work hard at improving not only the reputation of the FAREWELL TO THE HON. THE Supreme Court but also at increasing the public’s understanding of the judiciary. CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN H. The Supreme Court website, www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au, is designed PHILLIPS to disseminate a broad range of information, from particulars on jury service to detailed court listings. It is updated on a daily basis. The Court maintains an active On 17 October 2003, the Supreme Court farewelled the previous Chief Justice, system of consulting its users to make sure that it adheres to the principles of "best the Honourable John Harber Phillips, AC, after 12 years of dedicated and distin- practice". guished work in that role and a total of 18 years as a member of the Court. We wish Speeches given by Supreme Court judges are posted up to the website soon him all the very best for the future. after their delivery to public forums and can be accessed on the website under The Honourable Justice John Winneke AC, RFD, President of the Court of "Publications/speeches". Appeal, filled in as acting Chief Justice from 25 October 2003 for the one month up As well, judges of this Court often participate in extra-curricular honorary until my official appointment on 25 November 2003. I would like to personally community activities, including holding senior university positions, providing thank Justice Winneke for stepping in at this crucial time. assistance to convicted offenders and supporting the corrections system through the THE YEAR IN REVIEW Adult Parole Board and the Forensic Leave Panel. I would like to pay tribute to the
It is my pleasure to report a noticeable increase in the Court’s efficiency lev- judges’ willingness to shoulder extra responsibilities in the community interest. els. As a result of the very fine work and commitment of the judges, masters and During this period the Court also held two Open Days during Law Week, when assisting judicial staff, in 2004 every civil case sent for trial was disposed of for the several hundred people attended personally conducted tours of the court. Tours first time in many years. At the same time, the Court of Appeal has continued to included such highlights as visits to the restored dungeons, originally built in the determine a substantial volume of civil and criminal appeals. I emphasise that this 1880s and used to house prisoners at the Court until the 1950s. was achieved by the stretching of judges’ workloads to the highest levels. It is doubt- ful that judges can continue to meet such demands without an impact on their health and the Court’s work.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 3 REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE
Recently also, there have been numerous reports in the media about judicial TECHNOLOGY AND THE COURT remuneration, pensions, and other aspects of judges’ lives. Whilst the media has a Substantial upgrades to Court technology facilities occurred during the significant role in fostering debate, it also has a responsibility to ensure that debates reporting period. I am pleased to say that the Supreme Court IT staff performed are properly informed. This can be difficult where the object of such media reports, tremendously at this time, managing to very efficiently organise the rapid imple- judges, find themselves bound by convention and tradition not to speak out in pub- mentation of new services and equipment. lic, particularly where the issue in question may be political in nature. It is of The Court’s facilities for e-trials are now excellent. Many readers of this report course important for a democratic society such as ours to foster scrutiny and public will by now be familiar with the facilities and resources designed to assist parties in discussion about the work of the judicial system. However, it is also vital that the running hearings electronically. The process began with the running of the case system continues to command the respect it deserves, not least for its role as the last Minson Nacap P/L v Barwon Region Water Authority (2004), where an eTrial, bastion of the individual against state powers – a long-held principle of our demo- with the co-operation of IT members of staff and the Registrar, was successfully co- cratic system. ordinated from beginning to end. JUDICIAL EDUCATION In addition to this, in 2003 most judges undertook a course over five weeks outside court hours which explored IT in civil litigation, as set out in Practice Note Many judges have been active in legal education and professional develop- 1 of 2002. As the Practice Note is updated or as new judges join the court, this is ment, attending judicial seminars and lectures throughout the year. expected to be a continuous educational process. Some are organised by the Judicial College of Victoria (JCV), which was estab- Protocols in 2003-2004 were also introduced to assist smaller law firms with- lished in May 2003. The College assists judges to develop and maintain the skills out dedicated IT departments to make use of the benefits of the newly installed necessary for effective judicial work as well as enhance social awareness. It provides technology during litigation. an invaluable forum for judges to extend and deepen their knowledge and insights. All of the noted changes were in line with the release of the Attorney-General’s The Commonwealth Law Conference was held in Melbourne in April 2003. Justice Statement late in the period, in May 2004, which signalled an emphasis on The Conference was attended by representatives from all jurisdictions of the the importance of "modernising justice". Commonwealth, including the Chief Justices of England, Canada and New Zealand. The Conference was rewarding in that it gave Victorian Supreme Court judges the ADMISSIONS opportunity to share ideas and get "up to speed" with developments occurring in The Supreme Court oversees the admission to practice of barristers and solici- other common law jurisdictions. tors under the Legal Practice Act 1996. Ceremonies are conducted throughout the Many Supreme Court judges also participated in Conference events as speak- year before a Full Court consisting of three judges. ers and convenors of sessions. One of the chief organisers was the Honourable In 2003 the Court admitted 817 persons resident in Victoria and overseas to Justice Bernard Teague, whose outstanding work helped make the conference a practise as barristers and solicitors of the Supreme Court, compared with 824 in major success. 2002. These figures are for the calendar year. In the first half of 2004, 546 individuals were admitted.
1Guidelines for the use of Technology in Litigation in any Civil Matter, (2002) 5 VR 107.
4 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE In a statement given on 12 April 2004, I said I was gravely concerned about the Premier’s announcement that the government proposed to reject the decision of The Attorney-General’s proposal to introduce acting judges was first raised in the independent JRT, meaning that Victoria’s judges and magistrates would contin- September 2003. Under this plan, it is anticipated that acting judges would be tem- ue to remain by far the lowest paid in the country. My statement received the sup- porarily appointed to the Bench from the ranks of barristers, solicitors and legal port of the Chief Judge of the County Court, the Chief Magistrate and the President academics. The proposal was put forward to help solve temporary problems of very of the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. It also affirmed the importance high judicial workloads. of the principle of judicial independence and the critical role of the JRT in elimi- Judges must have security of tenure, otherwise the system is at risk. It would nating politically-motivated decisions with respect to judicial remuneration. appear that acting federal judges are not possible under the Australian Constitution, On 11 May 2004 the Attorney-General announced legislation to stagger in since those who exercise judicial power of the Commonwealth under Chapter III parity of remuneration between the Federal Court and the Supreme Court of must be appointed according to the conditions set out in the Constitution. The Victoria. While the decision to establish parity is desirable, the scheme will not be question therefore arises as to whether State courts invested with federal jurisdiction completed until the latter part of 2007. As a result Victoria’s judges are currently can also include acting judges. This is a matter which has not yet been decided. significantly underpaid compared to their counterparts throughout the rest of the Constitutional considerations aside, the proposal was seen by the profession country and Federal judges’ salaries are considerably higher than the salaries of and the Court as raising serious questions as to the ability of an acting judge, whose judges of this Court. tenure is uncertain and dependant upon government decision, to deal in an inde- pendent way with litigation in which the government is interested and which is the HONOURS LIST subject of community controversy to which the government might be responsive. I congratulate the President of the Court of Appeal, the Honourable Justice Moreover, serving judges with full security of tenure face the invidious task of John Winneke, who was announced a Companion of the Order of Australia on the encountering a colleague as a judge one day but then facing that individual the Queen’s Birthday, 2004. The award was conferred for: "leadership in the law, to the next as barrister or solicitor representing a party. This is troubling for both the judi- administration of justice as President of the Victorian Court of Appeal and to the ciary and the legal community as a whole. Judges have full security of tenure to community". ensure that such situations do not occur, so that our courts remain free from any suggestion of bias or corruption and are seen to be independent in every respect. It should be remembered that the Constitution stands not to protect judges but to promote the rule of law and to protect judicial independence – one facet of which is security of tenure. One highly significant event in this reporting period concerned with judicial independence was the decision of the Government not to support the determination of the Judicial Remuneration Tribunal (JRT).
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 5 REPORT OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE
APPOINTMENTS AND 2004 RETIREMENTS 17 March Simon Paul Whelan QC was appointed to be a Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria. 2003 30 April The Honourable Norman Michael O’Bryan resigned as a Reserve 15 February The Honourable Barry Watson Beach, resigned as a Judge of the Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria. Supreme Court of Victoria. 22 May The Honourable John David Phillips elected to retire from full 9 April Stuart Ross Morris QC was appointed to be a Judge of the time duty as a Judge of Appeal and a Judge of the Supreme Court Supreme Court of Victoria. of Victoria. 24 May The Honourable Richard Elgin McGarvie, a Judge of the Supreme 8 June The Honourable Geoffrey Arthur Akeroyd Nettle, a Judge of the Court of Victoria from 1972 to 1992, died in his 78th year. Supreme Court of Victoria, was appointed to be a Judge of the 13 October The Honourable Rosemary Anne Balmford was appointed to be a Court of Appeal. Reserve Judge of the Supreme Court of Victoria. 8 June Elizabeth Jane Hollingworth SC was appointed to be a Judge of 21 September The Honourable Robert Brooking AO resigned as a Reserve Judge the Supreme Court of Victoria. of the Supreme Court of Victoria. 14 June In the Queen’s Birthday Honours List the Honourable John 17 October The Honourable John Harber Phillips AC, Chief Justice of the Spence Winneke AO, President of the Court of Appeal, was Supreme Court of Victoria since 1991, resigned. appointed to be a Companion of the Order of Australia. 17 October The Honourable John Spence Winneke AO, President of the Court of Appeal, was appointed to be Acting Chief Justice of the Supreme CONCLUSION
Court of Victoria for a period of three months or until the Despite all the challenges we face, the judiciary can look back upon the peri- appointment of a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria, od 2003-2004 as a time of many achievements. It is apparent that we are learning whichever is the lesser. to become even more efficient than before and now stand at the forefront of inno- 25 November The Honourable Marilyn Louise Warren, a Judge of the Supreme vative technology initiatives. Morale and pride has lifted generally and we are see- Court of Victoria was appointed to be Chief Justice of the Court. ing a return of much high-profile, complex litigation to this Court. 16 December Stephen William Kaye QC was appointed to be a Judge of the I see at this time three key factors in the shaping of the Court’s future: The Supreme Court of Victoria provision of sufficient resources, control of court governance and the refinement of the types of jurisdiction to be exercised by the Court in that future.
Marilyn L Warren Chief Justice of Victoria
6 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Chief Executive Officer Fin McRae.
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REVIEW
During the reporting period the position of Chief Executive Officer was SIGNIFICANT REMEDIAL WORKS occupied by: We implemented significant remedial works, with a particular focus on fire • Bruce McLean July 2002 to July 2003 and stormwater infiltration. In addition, we completed the refurbishment of the • Jim Paterson (Acting CEO) August 2003 to March 2004 inner courtyard, restoring the courtyard and the overhead verandas to their former • Findlay McRae Appointed April 2004 and ongoing 1930s glory and modernising the area to include under-weather protection and dis- CHANGE IN REPORTING PERIOD abled access. In addition, we implemented significant improvements to the e-Court infrastructure in Courts 11 and 12 where the Court conducted the major criminal This Annual Report reflects a change in reporting period from calendar year trial of 2003 DPP v. Bendali Michael Debs and Jason Joseph Roberts. to financial year and includes a transitional 18-month Judges’ Annual Report start- ing on 1 January 2003, and financial statements covering the financial years ended MAJOR CRIMINAL TRIALS 30 June 2003 and 30 June 2004. During the period the Court prepared a business case in support of additional FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE funding for major criminal trials. It is worth noting that the Court attracted criminal cases involving serious indictable crime other than homicide. On average, The Financial Statements for 2002–03 and 2003–04 indicate budget over- a homicide trial runs 24 days. However we anticipate these major trials typically to spends for the Court of $1.85 million and $2.47 million, respectively. run for a much greater duration, requiring significantly more resources. CENTENARY SITTING OF THE ELECTRONIC DELIVERY OF HIGH COURT SERVICES On 6 October 2003 the High Court of Australia celebrated its centenary with a The general public increasingly uses and expects Internet access to govern- special ceremonial sitting in the Banco Court of the Supreme Court of Victoria. The ment institutions and instrumentalities. The same trend is apparent with the Court. Banco Court was the initial home of the High Court. During the reporting period Court Administration set a strategic objective to The full Court of the High Court sat and the event was nationally televised by improve the electronic delivery of services to Court proceedings, litigants and Court the ABC. The Governor General, His Excellency Michael Jeffrey, attended and the administrators. Planned developments include an upgraded IT infrastructure, Court was addressed by the Prime Minister, The Honourable John Howard, and the improved service support to litigants accessing the Court over the Internet, video Attorney-General for the State of Victoria, The Honourable Rob Hulls representing conferencing capabilities and electronic presentation of evidence in courtrooms. all State Attorneys-General. Honoured guests included heads of jurisdiction from courts throughout Australia and New Zealand and the Judges of the Court. The administrative and security arrangements to host this event were signifi- cant and the success of the day and its smooth administration reflected great credit on our administration staff.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 7 CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER’S REVIEW
JURY INFORMATION MANAGE- NEW STRATEGIC PLAN INITIATED
MENT SYSTEM (JIMS) The Supreme Court Strategic Plan 2004–07 was prepared during the period. The Court developed and implemented statewide the Jury Information It articulates the Strategic Planning Initiative, which incorporates all jurisdictions Management System (JIMS) to improve the administrative processes associated and includes major themes from the Courts Strategic Directions Project. One of with jury management. Improvements included streamlining the database of the main aims of the plan will be to establish specific goals for Court staff and prospective jurors by developing an electronic process, replacing the previously action planning that reflects those goals, enabling a coherent approach to setting labour-intensive manual process. priorities, while ensuring projects comply with overall Court objectives. The plan will demonstrate the importance of establishing a strategic plan and how setting WEBSITE UPGRADE individual priorities filters down to all areas of responsibility. The Court increased and updated the information available on its website at www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au and re-launched the website on 22 May 2003. The COURT SECURITY website benefited from an extensive redesign based on feedback from both the The Court operates under a comprehensive perimeter security system, Court’s staff and the public, including simplified navigation and easier access to supported by a strong police presence. In addition, Court staff work with the Office content. The website provides an increasing amount of timely and factual informa- of Corrections to ensure a high level of prisoner security. To support further the tion about the Court and its procedures to the public and the legal profession. emphasis on security, the Court established a new position of Facility and Security THE HERITAGE FACILITY Manager in June 2004 to provide a senior management role in overseeing Court security in conjunction with each of the security and custody providers. The Court finalised its Strategic Facilities and Works and Services Plan designed to maintain the heritage facility over the next five to 10 years. The plan STAFF ACHIEVEMENTS AND aims to maintain heritage requirements, occupational health and safety standards, AWARDS and security needs. The Court continued to identify and acknowledge significant staff achieve- LEGAL PRECINCT FEASIBILITY ments. Over the reporting period, 19 Court staff members received Partnership STUDY Awards and another 19 staff members attracted Chief Justice Awards, as detailed on page 9. Commenced in June 2004 the Legal Precinct Feasibility Study examined options available to the Court in terms of locating or creating a new court complex. A study commissioned by the Department of Justice Court Services, it reviewed the Court’s existing accommodation as well as that of the County Court, Magistrates’ Court and Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and considered the future of the legal precinct surrounding the courts.
8 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Partnership Award Recipients I wish to express my appreciation for the encouragement and support Name Acknowledged By/For provided by the Chief Justice, Judges and staff in my initial two months. Hayley Dexter and Patricia Nominated by Prothonotary/Principal Registrar I wish to acknowledge the departure of former Chief Executive Officer Bruce McAndrew Joe Saltalamacchia for the implementation of new procedures and provisions for the appointment of McLean in September 2003, after an accomplished career at the Court spanning Public Notaries in the State of Victoria. nearly 35 years. Importantly, I appreciate the valuable contribution of acting Chief Michael Greenway Nominated by Prothonotary/Principal Registrar Executive Officer Jim Paterson for his efforts during the intervening period until my Joe Saltalamacchia for the training and development arrival in April 2004. of Registry Staff with regard to Probate jurisdiction.
Melissa Biram, Nominated by Prothonotary/Principal Registrar Jo Galliott and Millie Poon Joe Saltalamacchia for contributing ideas to improve facilities and processes regarding the storage and handling of documents.
Fin McRae Dani Zivcovic Nominated by Manager Steven Wharton for unfail- Chief Executive Officer ing courtesy, kindness and helpfulness in dealing with telephone queries.
Samantha Loo Nominated by H R Manager Nicole Belbin for professionalism and innovation in maintaining the Associates Manual.
Mark de Bruyn, Gabriel Bin, Lynda Nominated by Juries Commissioner Rudy Collodetti, Margot Fitzclarence and Monteleone for working collaboratively to pilot Tom Meich of the Ballarat Law successfully the regional implementation of the Courts, Jim Johnston, Kaye Mastros Juries Information Management System. and Shantelle Vercoe
Vivienne Thompson Nominated by Registry Manage John Bennett for her work toward development and greater integration of the Court’s registry computer applications.
Rowena Hansen Nominated by Registry Manager John Bennett for developing an internal training program and helping to foster a culture where knowledge and skills are seen as indispensable.
Leah Hickey Nominated by Registry Officer Duane Cameron for professionalism and approach in the position of Orders Supervisor in the Registry.
Chief Justice Award Recipients Name Category
Michael Halpin, Graeme Barry, 10-Year Service Award Prue Innes, Gary Edwards and Lydia Peritore
Kay Hallinan, Rowena Hansen, Quiet Achiever Carol Anderson, Joan Simmons and Michael Bartolo
Tammie Mallia, Vivienne Thompson, Ideas and Improvement Partnership award recipients (top photo from left) Juries Division staff – Katy Barnett and Lucy McKay Kaye Mastros, Mark de Bruyn, Margot Fitzclarence, Lynda Collodetti, Shantelle Vercoe, Jim Johnston and Tom Meich (bottom photos from Sean Linehan and Christina Teague Community Spirit left) Rowena Hansen and Vivienne Thompson of the Registry’s Office. Sue Williamson, John Vardy and Service Delivery Trevor Peters
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 9 COURT OF APPEAL
A Division of the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal comprises the Chief Criminal Division Appeals Statistics Justice, President and Judges of Appeal. The Court of Appeal determines appeals Six months to from criminal and civil trials heard by Judges of the Supreme Court and the County 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Criminal Appeals Court. In addition, the Court hears appeals from proceedings that have come before Pending at Start of the Reporting Period 346 296 the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) and other tribunals. Acts of Filed 362 180 Finalised 399 130 Parliament, Rules of Court and Practice Statements govern court procedure. Some Pending at 30 June 309 346 Appeals require Leave of a Judge or Leave of the Court of Appeal before a Notice of Nature of Applications Filed Appeal can be filed. Appeals against Conviction or Conviction and Sentence 97 34 Appeals against Sentence 230 122 OVERVIEW Miscellaneous 35 24 Total 362 180 Since the inception of the Court of Appeal in June 1995, the workload of the Elapsed Times of Applications Finalised (in Months) Court in both its Civil and Criminal Divisions has continued unabated. The statis- Sentence 8.1 7.6 Conviction and Sentence 18.1 20.8 tics for the period of this report (both the six-month period 1 January to 30 June Miscellaneous 10.6 5.4 2003 and the financial year 1 July 2003 to 30 June 2004) are set out in the tables 1 January 2003– opposite. 30 June 2004 Appointments and Retirements Profile of S.582 Crimes Act Sentence Applications to a Single Judge The Honourable J H Phillips A C, Chief Justice, retired on 17 October 2003. His Total Number Listed 283 contribution to the work of the Criminal Division of the Court was considerable. Applications Granted 99 Applications Refused* 118 On 25 November 2003 the Honourable Marilyn Warren was appointed as Applications Abandoned 43 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Victoria. Her Honour had sat as an additional Applications Adjourned 24 Judge of Appeal while she was a Judge of the Trial Division and was familiar with *Of the applications refused, 34 applicants elected to proceed to a hearing before the Court comprising three Judges of Appeal. the work of both Divisions of the Court. As well, since her appointment, her Honour has continued to sit in both Civil and Criminal Divisions. Civil Division Appeals Statistics The Honourable Mr Justice J D Phillips elected to retire from full-time service Six months to 2003–04 30 June 2003 as a Judge of Appeal on 22 May 2004. His Honour was widely regarded as one of the Number of Civil Appeals outstanding lawyers on the Court of Appeal bench since its inception and the Court Pending at Start of the Reporting Period 175 204 Filed 166 54 is looking forward to his continuing contribution to the work of the Court, from Finalised 159 83 time to time, in his capacity as a Reserve Judge. Pending at 30 June 182 175 On 8 June 2004, the Honourable Justice Geoffrey A A Nettle, a Judge of the Elapsed Time Averages (in Months) Filing Notice of Appeal to Final Disposition 15.5 15.0 Trial Division since 23 July 2002, was appointed as a Judge of Appeal. Filing Appeal Book to Hearing 12.6 13.1 On 17 October 2003 the Honourable Justice J S Winneke A C, President of the Nature of Civil Applications Court, was appointed as Acting Chief Justice for a period of three months or until a Leave to Appeal 85 44 Extension of Time 5 9 Chief Justice was appointed. Regrettably the delay in appointing the Honourable Stay of Execution 20 4 Marilyn Warren to the office of Chief Justice resulted in the usual complement of Security for Costs 18 4 Dismissal/Striking Out Notice of Appeal 1 0 Judges of Appeal being reduced for some months. Expedition of Hearing 11 6 In the Australia Day Honours List 2004, the President, the Honourable J S Appeal Not to be Taken to be Abandoned 7 3 Winneke A C was appointed as a Companion of the Order of Australia. Directions 5 1 Sundry 17 7 Total 169 78
10 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Criminal Division: Number of Appeals— Civil Division: Number of Appeals— 1 January 2003–30 June 2004 1 January 2003–30 June 2004
400 400
320 320
240 240
160 160
80 80
0 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04
At Start of Reporting Period Filed Finalised At Start of Reporting Period Filed Finalised Pending at 30 June Pending at 30 June
THE WORK OF THE COURT The Rules of Court governing criminal appeals have been substantially revised to require the parties to take steps within certain times. These rules will As at the end of the reporting period, the number of cases awaiting hearing operate with respect to all criminal appeals filed on or after 1 July 2004. The remained steady. The Court sat in two divisions – one Criminal and one Civil – prescribed times can and will be extended as appropriate. It is expected that in during most weeks of the legal year. On rare occasions the Court has been able to focusing the attention of the legal profession and convicted persons on their sit in three divisions. As noted in the previous report, with at least one Judge of appeals, many delays such as late adjournments and late amendment of grounds Appeal absent on leave at any given time, to provide three divisions of the Court is should be minimised. The Court aims that within an acceptable period of time only almost impossible. Even with the assistance of the Honourable Mr Justice O’Bryan appeals that are properly prepared and ready to proceed will be listed for hearing. who sat as a Reserve Judge from 2 February to 22 April 2004, and with the assis- In the past the Court and its Registry have taken far too much responsibility for the tance of Judges from the Trial Division (as many as four additional Judges during timely preparation of appeals. First Term 2004), little impression on the lists of cases awaiting hearing has been achieved. Comment on the Statistical Data (Civil) The workload of the Court of Appeal continued to be relentless and punishing The number of appeals lodged in the financial year 2003–04 (166) has and is likely to remain the case with the present complement of Judges of Appeal. increased marginally over the number lodged in the previous reporting period (161). The continuing availability of assistance from Judges from the Trial Division is However, the number of appeals disposed of in 2003–04 (159) has increased from essential for current outputs to be maintained. If there is to be any improvement, a 144. The elapsed times have remained relatively constant as have the number of civil larger number of permanent judicial personnel will be required. The Court actively applications heard. Again, it is the Court’s view that the elapsed times averaging seeks ways to reduce its load of pending cases and is always considering suggestions during 2003–04 over 15 months from filing of the Notice of Appeal to final disposi- for improvement from all quarters. Any steps taken must always be fully considered tion is longer than desirable. The only way to overcome this situation is to increase and the interests of justice must remain paramount. The Court is not a ‘business the number of Judges to hear appeals. unit’ of Government. It is a part of one of the three organs of Government with a Sittings in Regional Centres specific role – to do justice to the people of Victoria. In accordance with usual practice, the Court sat for a week in the gazetted Comment on the Statistical Data (Criminal) circuit districts of Warrnambool in March 2003, Sale in August 2003 and The overall number of criminal appeals at 30 June 2004 was lower than at Shepparton in March 2004. Over the past nine years, these circuit sittings have 30 June 2003, but the composition has changed a little with slightly more sentence become an integral part of the Court’s schedule. It is believed that the circuit sit- appeals being filed in 2003–04 and slightly fewer conviction appeals. The elapsed tings of the Court are welcomed by the local communities and particularly by local times have extended a little but this is in part due to some very high lodgment rates government and the legal profession in the regions. The wider rural community in 2000–02. The Court considers that the elapsed times for sentence appeals and rarely has the opportunity to see the work of the courts, particularly the Supreme miscellaneous applications are satisfactory, but that the times for conviction Court and its Appeal Division, and circuit sittings serve to bring the work of the appeals are too long. highest court in Victoria to regional communities. It must be remembered that a conviction appeal is very different from a Members of the Court are very appreciative of the enthusiasm for their circuit sentence appeal. A conviction appeal will, on average, take twice as long to hear sittings displayed by the local government representatives and their staff, to the and will require, in many cases, a traversal of most of the evidence given in a trial. respective Deputy Prothonotaries and their staff, to the local professions and the The time taken to consider a conviction appeal and to write a judgment will, of Director of Public Prosecutions and his staff and, particularly, to Victoria Legal Aid. course, vary from case to case, but will usually take a far greater amount of a The contributions made by each of these individuals are significant and ensure the Judge’s ‘out of Court’ time. continuing success of regional sittings. An initiative in First Term 2004 where, with the assistance of additional Judges from the Trial Division and a Reserve Judge, more conviction appeals were heard, bore good results but also highlighted the additional preparation and judg- ment writing time required in conviction appeals. Additional stress placed on the legal profession, particularly upon the Director of Public Prosecutions and his staff, and upon Victoria Legal Aid also became evident during this initiative.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 11 COURT OF APPEAL
THE STAFF OF THE COURT It was previously reported that new Rules of Court were planned for manag- ing criminal appeals. These new rules were made at the end of the 2003–04 finan- The staff of the Court remained one of its greatest assets. The dedication and cial year and commenced operation on 1 July 2004. It is expected that benefits from support displayed by the associates to each Judge, the four secretaries, five tipstaves these rules will be recognised during the next financial year. Considerable changes and three research assistants and the two drivers/messengers continued to be to registry procedures were necessary flowing from this initiative and registry staff outstanding as they provided excellence in service. The research assistants will members have enthusiastically responded to the need for new systems. remain with the Court for one year. As in previous years, they have provided consider- Further development work planned for next year includes: able assistance to the Judges. The secretaries and the tipstaves – most of whom have • a project to investigate the provision of electronic filing of certain been with the Court since its beginning – quietly continued their exemplary service. documents; THE REGISTRY • continued development of new procedures and systems to accommodate The specialised role of the Court of Appeal registry continued. Unlike a new criminal rules; general court registry, which must meet the overall requirements of a court as a • planning for succession on the expected retirements of key judicial staff whole, the Court of Appeal registry, with the more tailored and specific aims of an in 2005; appeal court, must be responsive to the immediate needs of the Court. To provide • improvement in file management and transfer arrangements between this service, experienced staff members are required. During the reporting period, the County Court and the Court of Appeal registries; and the registry coped with the absence of a highly experienced staff member who was • improvement of information provision to the registry by associates to seconded to a section of the Department of Justice. During his absence it was not Judges of the Trial Division and of the County Court. possible to ‘backfill’ his position because of its requirement for special expertise. The Registrar is to be complimented for his skill in maintaining the registry’s Remaining staff members took up the extra workload without complaint. The staff quality of service during the reporting period. members are to be commended for their unflagging efforts in maintaining levels of High Court Special Leave Applications service. The registry staff members are not specially classified in the public service During the reporting period 39 applications were filed seeking special leave to structure and it is quite usual for the junior members (usually two in number) to appeal to the High Court from the decisions of the Court sitting in its civil jurisdic- achieve promotion to other court registries. Their training in the Court of Appeal tion. As at the date of this Annual Report, none of these applications had been registry makes them sought after. This fact does not assist the Court of Appeal granted although one was referred to the Court to be argued as if on appeal. Some registry, which must then recruit and train new junior staff. As well, due to the spe- are still pending. cial nature of Court of Appeal requirements, there is probably a need to review the During the reporting period 25 applications were filed seeking special leave to qualification requirements for its registry staff. Legal qualification is probably nec- appeal to the High Court from the decisions of the Court sitting in its criminal essary for at least one of the senior positions. jurisdiction. As at the date of this Annual Report, three of these applications had During the period under review, new rules governing civil applications to the been granted on limited grounds. Some are still pending. Court, streamlining of time frames for filing of documents, and allowing for appli- cations to be heard ‘on the papers’ were introduced. The registry was required to adapt its procedures for processing such applications.
12 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report TRIAL DIVISION: CIVIL
Judges in the Civil Division of the Trial Division hear and determine all civil work of Supreme Court practice. Cases that may be entered in the List cases involving large claims, generally exceeding $200,000. The Division comprises are proceedings commenced by writ arising out of, or in any way con- the Commercial and Equity Division and the Common Law Division. The Principal cerning, a building contract. Judge of the Commercial and Equity Division for the period in review was the • Admiralty List – The List provides specialist management of cases con- Honourable Justice Byrne and the Principal Judge of the Common Law Division was cerning maritime and associated disputes. It accepts proceedings, which the Honourable Justice Ashley. The Judicial Organisation Chart on page 33 sets out are brought to the Court pursuant to the Admiralty Act 1988 (Cwlth), the Judges and Masters who assisted during the reporting period. and cases concerning loss or damage to a ship or by a ship, or to goods When first filed, proceedings in the Civil Division fall into one of four major carried by sea. groups: • Intellectual Property List – A Judge-controlled List designed to manage • Writs for Trial by Jury – Usually, proceedings relating to personal proceedings regarding patents, trade marks, designs, EL rights, copy- injury claims, and employment or motor car accidents where the plain- rights and other related areas. Proceedings may be commenced in rela- tiff requires trial by a Judge and jury of six persons (including Major tion to an infringement or in order to determine validity. Torts List proceedings). • Victorian Taxation Appeals List – Proceedings in the List arise in the • Writs for Trial by Judge Alone – A wide variety of proceedings, includ- context of objections to an assessment, decision or determination by the ing large debt claims, defaults in mortgage payments resulting in sales Commissioner for State Revenue with respect to liability for any tax, by mortgagees and actions for possession, claims for relief for breach of duty, levy, fee, charge or other impost. Some proceedings are appeals contract, proceedings in the Admiralty List, Building Cases List and on, or referrals of, questions of law from the Victorian Civil and Intellectual Property List, and personal injury claims where the plaintiff Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). does not require the trial to be held before a jury (including Major Torts The Common Law Division (pages 22–23) comprises of the following special- List proceedings). ist lists: • Originating Motions – Provided for in many Acts, among the range of • Major Torts List – This List manages tort litigation from the point of proceedings brought by originating motion are those relating to claims issue to referral to the Civil List for fixing for trial. The Judge-in-Charge by beneficiaries or other persons for further provision from deceased presides over directions hearings and most interlocutory applications. estates, applications to remove caveats from property titles or to remove The aim of the List is to ensure the efficient and expeditious progress of or modify restrictive covenants. matters through the interlocutory stage of litigation. It also manages • Miscellaneous – All other proceedings, including special applications related proceedings with the aim of providing a unified approach to required by legislation that are not able to be categorised by registry resolving proceedings arising out of a single event or raising common staff at the time of filing, enforcement proceedings from the issues of law. Magistrates’ Court, appeals or reviews from the Magistrates’ and County • Valuation Compensation and Planning List – The List manages Courts, Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal appeals on ques- proceedings relating to valuation of land under the Valuation of Land tions of law, and transfers from Federal Courts and other State Courts. Act 1960, compensation for resumption of land under the Land The Commercial and Equity Division (pages 18–21) comprises the following Acquisition and Compensation Act 1986, and by way of appeal (includ- specialist lists: ing the application for leave to appeal) or by way of referral on a ques- • Corporations List – Proceedings relating specifically to relief sought tion of law from VCAT. under the Corporations Law, including applications to wind up compa- Usually, proceedings are categorised under the principal relief claimed, nies that are insolvent, to set aside statutory demands served on compa- which may or may not be the principal or substantive head of relief nies that owe money, or to have directors of companies that have gone sought (on the claim or counterclaim) at the time the proceeding is into liquidation publicly examined. ready for trial. • Commercial List – Proceedings that arise out of ordinary commercial transactions, including any proceeding relating to insurance, banking CIVIL CASES OVERALL or finance in which there is a question that has importance in trade or Civil cases overall relate to all proceedings commenced in the Civil jurisdic- commerce. A Judge-controlled List, proceedings can be either filed tion, including the combined statistics of the Commercial and Equity Division and directly into this List or be subsequently admitted by order of a Judge. Common Law Division. Statistics shown cover the reporting period, comprising the • Building Cases List – Proceedings are managed by a Judge whose six months to 30 June 2003 and 2003–04. Overall, the Civil Division experienced specialised knowledge in building and construction law enables the real an increase in proceedings filed of approximately 17.6 per cent over the reporting issues between the parties to be identified so that procedures appropriate period. for their resolution may be devised and implemented within the frame-
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 13 TRIAL DIVISION: CIVIL
Originating Process – Melbourne Originating Process at a Glance (Overall) The number of originating proceedings filed at Melbourne during the report- Six months to ing period totalled 8,590, comprised as follows: 2003–04 30 June 2003 Proceedings Filed (Melbourne) • 491 Writs for trial by jury Writs for trial by jury 374 117 • 4,107 Writs for trial by Judge alone Writs for trial by Judge alone 2,901 1,206 • 1,091 Originating motions Originating motions 751 340 • 1,815 Corporations Corporations 1,265 550 • 139 Commercial List Commercial List 97 42 • 947 Miscellaneous Miscellaneous* 653 294 Total 6,041 2,549 Originating Process – Regional Registries Proceedings Filed (Regional Registries) The number of originating proceedings filed at regional registries during the Writs for trial by jury 24 8 reporting period totalled 242, comprised as follows: Writs for trial by Judge alone 137 36 • 32 Writs for trial by jury Originating motions 18 6 Miscellaneous* 9 4 • 173 Writs for trial by Judge alone Total 188 54 • 24 Originating motions Circuit Proceedings by Location • 13 Miscellaneous Ballarat 27 10 These results exclude all Corporations and Commercial List proceedings. Bendigo 15 6 Since the work of these Lists involve mainly companies, banks and the tax office Geelong 27 5 with main offices in Melbourne, such proceedings are filed in Melbourne. Hamilton 1 1 Horsham 8 2 Mildura 31 7 Sale 9 2 Shepparton 9 1 Wangaratta 18 2 Warrnambool 43 18 Total 188 54
*Including enforcement proceedings, appeals/reviews and proceedings transferred to the Court.
14 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Types of Proceedings Filed (Melbourne)—2003–04 General Trial List: Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004
600
Writs for Trial by Jury 500
Writs for Trial by Judge Alone 400
Originating Motions 300
Corporations 200
Commercial List 100
Miscellaneous 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04
At Start of Reporting Period Entered or Reinstated Finalised Pending at 30 June
General Trial List – Melbourne General Trial List Activity at a Glance The Listing Master of the Court enters proceedings ready to be heard in the Six months to General Trial List – the principal trial list of the Court at Melbourne . 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings Case Statistics At Start of the Reporting Period 463 449 Entered or Reinstated 573 261 At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- Removed from the List 5 4 ings totalled 449. The Listing Master fixed 834 proceedings during the reporting Finalised 528 239 period and removed nine proceedings from the List. Finalised during previous period but noted in this period 15 4 Pending at 30 June 488 463 The List finalised 767 proceedings during the reporting period as follows: Method of Disposition • 444 settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued without Trial 306 138 • 154 settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued after Trial Commenced 115 39 Tried to Judgment 106 59 • 165 tried to judgment Transferred to County, Magistrates’ or Federal Courts 1 3 • four transferred to County, Magistrates’ or Federal Courts Total 528 239 Age of Proceedings Finalised (in Months) In addition, the List noted 19 cases finalised during the previous reporting From Commencement to Disposition period comprising calendar year 2002. Median 14.8 17.6 The number of cases pending on 30 June 2004 totalled 488, compared with 75th Percentile 27.1 31.2 90th Percentile 40.2 39.9 463 pending on 30 June 2003. The types of cases pending involving claims for Mean 20.0 21.9 damages arising out of personal injury included: From Entry to Disposition Median 5.8 5.8 Cases to be heard by a jury: 75th Percentile 8.8 10.3 • 6 motor vehicle 90th Percentile 14.7 19.1 • 47 industrial Mean 8.0 8.7 Types of Cases Pending (Personal Injury) • 24 defamation To be Heard by Jury: • 40 other Motor Vehicle 4 2 Cases to be heard by a Judge alone: Industrial 27 20 Defamation 10 14 • 16 motor vehicle Other 15 25 • 22 other To be Heard by Judge Alone: Motor Vehicle 9 7 Elapsed Times of Proceedings Finalised and Pending Other 13 9 Total 78 77 Under Practice Note No. 3 of 1995, the Court set a benchmark to ensure the Other Types of Cases Pending (Judge Alone) Listing Master gives 80 per cent of proceedings a date for trial within three months Damages 74 65 of being deemed by the Court to be ready for trial. Debt 45 32 Declaration 57 69 During the reporting period, the List achieved median elapsed times of: Corporations 5 6 • 16.4 months from commencement to disposition and 5.8 months from Probate 86 62 entry in the List to disposition for age of proceedings finalised; and Appeals/Reviews 56 59 Possession 13 8 • 11.4 months from commencement to entry in the List and 6.6 months Building Cases 2 0 from entry in the List to 30 June for age of proceedings pending. Other 72 85 Total 410 386 Age of Proceedings Pending (in Months) From Commencement to Entry Median 11.4 11.5 75th Percentile 20.7 21.8 90th Percentile 33.5 38.2 Mean 15.4 16.3 From Entry to 30 June Median 6.6 4.3 75th Percentile 13.5 10.9 90th Percentile 26.7 27.1 Mean 11.1 9.6
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 15 Long Cases List: Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004
60
50
40
30
20
10
0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04
At Start of Reporting Period Entered or Reinstated TRIAL DIVISION: CIVIL Finalised Pending at 30 June
Long Cases List Long Cases List Activity at a Glance Managed by the Listing Master, the Long Cases List comprises civil proceed- Six months to ings expected to exceed 12 sitting days at trial. 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings How We Manage Cases At Start of Reporting Period 53 54 After the Listing Master exercises her discretion to enter the proceeding in the Entered or Reinstated 33 13 List, she sets a future trial date, usually six to 12 months in advance, to give the Removed from the List 1 1 Finalised 29 12 parties sufficient time to prepare their cases for trial. In addition, long lead times Finalised during previous period but noted in this period - 1 take into account the heavy commitments placed on the Court and the time and Pending at 30 June 56 53 resources required to accommodate such lengthy trials. Method of Disposition Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued without Trial 20 9 Case Statistics Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued after Start of Trial 7 1 At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- Tried to Judgment 2 2 ings totalled 54. The Listing Master entered 46 proceedings during the reporting Transferred to County, Magistrates’ or Federal Courts - - Total 29 12 period and removed two proceedings from the List. Age of Proceedings Finalised (in Months) The List finalised 41 proceedings during the reporting period as follows: From Commencement to Disposition • 29 Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial Median 37.4 25.3 • 8 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced 75th Percentile 64.4 35.8 • 4 Tried to judgment 90th Percentile 81.8 61.0 Mean 48.4 33.3 The number of cases pending on 30 June 2004 totalled 56, compared with 53 From Entry to Disposition pending on 30 June 2003. Median 11.8 14.6 Elapsed Times of Proceedings Finalised and Pending 75th Percentile 16.7 24.3 90th Percentile 28.6 24.9 During the reporting period, the List achieved median elapsed times of: Mean 18.5 17.1 • 37.4 months from commencement to disposition and 12.2 months Age of Proceedings Pending (in Months) from entry in the List to disposition for age of proceedings finalised; and From Commencement to Entry • 25.7 months from commencement to entry in the List and 11.1 months Median 25.7 25.3 from entry in the List to 30 June for age of proceedings pending. 75th Percentile 35.8 32.3 90th Percentile 54.2 54.8 Mean 30.2 28.9 From Entry to 30 June Median 11.1 12.1 75th Percentile 27.8 23.4 90th Percentile 45.2 43.4 Mean 17.5 19.0
16 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Listings – Regional Courts: Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004
20
15
10
5
0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04
At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised Pending at 30 June
Listing Information – Regional Courts Listing Information – Regional Courts at a Glance At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- Six months to ings awaiting trial for all Regional Courts totalled 21. The Regional Courts 2003–04 30 June 2003 finalised 40 proceedings over the reporting period, as follows: Number of Proceedings (All Regional Courts) Judge Alone: • 14 Settled, dismissed or discontinued without trial At Start of Reporting Period 14 12 • 21 Settled, dismissed or discontinued after trial commenced Entered 9 8 • 4 Tried to judgment Finalised 19 6 • 1 Other Pending at 30 June 4 14 The number of cases pending on 30 June 2004 totalled five, compared with 23 Judge and Jury: At Start of Reporting Period 9 9 pending on 30 June 2003. Entered 5 2 The majority of case activity in Regional Courts occurred at: Finalised 13 2 • Ballarat – one proceeding by Judge alone at the start of 2003–04, three Pending at 30 June 1 9 proceedings by Judge and jury entered and three finalised. Method of Disposition Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued without Trial 12 2 • Bendigo – two cases pending at 30 June 2004; one by Judge alone and Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued after Start of Trial 17 4 one by Judge and jury. Tried to Judgment 3 1 • Geelong – two proceedings at the start of 2003–04, one proceeding Other 0 1 entered, two proceedings finalised and two cases pending at 30 June Total 32 8 2004, including one by Judge and jury. • Wangaratta – two proceedings entered; one by Judge alone and one by Judge and jury and two proceedings finalised; one by Judge alone and one by Judge and jury. • Warrnambool – 15 proceedings at the start of 2003–04; seven by Judge alone and eight by Judge and jury, which were all finalised during the reporting period.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 17 TRIAL DIVISION:COMMERCIAL AND EQUITY DIVISION
OVERVIEW Corporations List Case Activity at a Glance The Commercial and Equity Division (CED) is the name given to that part of Six months to the Trial Division which is concerned with the management and trial of cases 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings which are allocated to the division. Broadly speaking, these cases are proceedings At Start of Reporting Period 212 183 brought in one or other of the six specialist lists of cases within the division, wills Filed 1,265 550 probate and deceased estate matters, trust matters, Charities Act matters, commer- Finalised 1,225 521 Pending at 30 June 252 212 cial arbitration matters and matters arising out of other commercial transactions. Types of Proceedings Filed The six specialist lists within the division are: To Wind up Company 893 330 • Corporations List Leave to Proceed 57 21 Reinstate to Register 56 27 • Commercial List Set Aside Statutory Demand 133 85 • Building Cases List Other Relief 126 87 • Admiralty List Total 1,265 550 Method of Disposition • Intellectual Property List Granted 682 299 • Victorian Taxation Appeals List Dismissed 89 33 The following information details the case activity for each of these lists in the Struck out 11 3 Discontinued 413 184 reporting period, which covers the six months to 30 June 2003 and the 12 months to Adjourned Sine Die 30 2 30 June 2004. Total 1,225 521 Age of Proceedings Finalised (in Months) Corporations List From Commencement to Disposition Justice Mandie succeeded Justice Hansen as Principal Judge of the Median 1.5 1.6 75th Percentile 2.3 2.3 Corporations List in February 2004. The List is conducted on the basis that applica- 90th Percentile 3.1 3.1 tions, whether contested or otherwise, will be heard as soon as is practically possi- Mean 2.1 2.0 ble. Thus, for example, if at all possible an application will be heard and disposed Types of Cases Pending To Wind up Company 150 99 of at its first return, or if that is not possible, as soon thereafter as is practicable. Leave to Proceed 10 12 The List operates in a manner analogous to the Commercial List with the emphasis Reinstate to Register 3 7 on expedition and a concentration on the essential point at issue. Set Aside Statutory Demand 20 32 Other Relief 69 62 How We Manage Cases Total 252 212 Age of Proceedings Pending (in Months) The management of the List is under the control of the Principal Judge in liai- Date of Entry to 30 June son with the Masters assigned to the Commercial and Equity Division, the Senior Median 1.2 2.1 Master and Master Evans. The Masters deal with most applications filed in the List, in 75th Percentile 5.6 7.5 90th Percentile 12.3 14.6 particular applications to wind up. Flexibility in the List is facilitated by the ability of Mean 4.1 5.5 Masters to refer matters to the Judge and conversely the Judge to a Master. A wide range of applications under the Corporations Act 2001 is dealt with by Case Statistics the Judge including, for example, applications concerning schemes of arrange- At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- ment, for directions (such as by a liquidator), voidable transactions, to mention a ings awaiting to be heard totalled 183. Over the reporting period, there were 1,815 few out of the myriad type of applications that are made. The work varies from the proceedings, broken down into application types as shown under ‘Types of unopposed application, which may be attended with difficulty, to the heavier type of Proceedings Filed’ in the table above. The number of cases finalised in the List over disputed litigation. the reporting period totalled 1,746. The adjoining statistical information is for the first time presented for an 18- The number of cases pending on 30 June 2004 totalled 252, compared with month period in order to bring the reporting to a financial year basis. As to the sta- 212 pending on 30 June 2003. tistics, the seemingly large number of proceedings discontinued is explained by the Elapsed Times of Proceedings Finalised and Pending fact that the bulk of these relates to winding up proceedings where the plaintiff has During the reporting period, the List achieved median elapsed times of: not continued with the application. • 1.6 months from commencement to disposition for the age of proceed- ings finalised; and • 1.2 months from date of entry in the List to 30 June for the age of proceedings pending.
18 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Corporations List: Commercial List: Number of Proceedings – Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004
1400 150
1200 120 1000 90 800
600 60
400 30 200
0 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 At Start of Reporting Period Filed Finalised At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised Pending at 30 June Pending at 30 June
Commercial List Commercial List Case Activity at a Glance The Commercial List is a group of commercial proceedings which have been Six months to entered into the List with a view to their intensive management and trial by special- 2003–04 30 June 2003 ist Judges. Number of Proceedings At Start of Reporting Period 60 46 Two Judges of the Division were appointed by the Chief Justice to be Entered 125 50 Commercial List Judges during the reporting period: the Honourable Justice Byrne Removed from the List 8 2 Finalised 88 30 (Principal Judge of the List) and the Honourable Justice Habersberger. Finalised during previous period but noted in this period 1 4 During the reporting period the conduct of the List has been characterised by Pending at 30 June 88 60 an increased readiness of the Judges to accept as appropriate for entry in the List a Method of Disposition Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued without Trial 72 18 wider range of commercial cases than in previous years. This has been to a large Settled, Dismissed or Discontinued after Start of Trial 3 2 extent in response to the perceived preference of litigants for judicial management Dismissed at Trial 4 4 of their cases, rather than the traditional hands-off approach. This has had the Tried to Judgment 9 6 Total 88 30 consequence that the number of cases in the List has increased, with a consequen- Six months to tial increase in the judicial time required for their management. The number of 2003–04 30 June 2003 cases in the List has increased from 46 to 88 during the period under report. %% Age of Proceedings Finalised (in Months) Notwithstanding this, the time which cases remain in the List pending disposition From Entry to Disposition has been reduced. That this has been achieved by the List Judges without any 0-1 4.5 3.4 increase in their number is a credit to their industry and dedication. 1-3 24.0 16.7 3-6 22.7 26.7 The List Judges meet from time to time with a Commercial List Users Group 6-9 31.8 26.7 whose members represent barristers and solicitors practising in the List and who 9-12 6.8 6.6 discuss matters of interest and advise the Judges as to the progress of and as to 12-18 10.2 10.0 18+ 0.0 9.9 improvements in the conduct of the List Age of Proceedings Pending (in Months) Date of Entry to 30 June How We Manage Cases 0-1 13.6 20.0 The intent of the List is that the Judges should at the earliest stage identify the 1-3 13.6 28.3 real commercial issues between the parties and mould the Court’s normal proce- 3-6 14.8 23.3 6-9 20.5 13.3 dures to achieve the speedy and efficient resolution of those issues in accordance 9-12 19.3 3.3 with law. To this end the Judges are available to hear urgent applications, even 12-18 12.5 6.7 outside normal court hours. Ordinarily, cases are listed for management directions 18+ 5.7 5.0 on Fridays. The objective of this management is to finalise the ordinary case within The very large percentage of cases in the List which were finalised without nine months of issue and to keep the number of directions hearings to a minimum. judgment is consistent with other areas of litigation in the Court. An objective of the Case Statistics management process of cases in the List has been to bring the parties to settlement Cases may be entered in the List by the choice of the plaintiff who endorses of their dispute at the earliest opportunity, well before the heavy expenses of the the case for entry in the List upon issue of the writ, or by order upon application by trial have been incurred. This has been achieved with respect to 76 per cent of the any party. At the start of the reporting period, on 1 January 2003, the number of cases in the List by the widespread use of mediation. The cooperation of the parties, proceedings waiting to be heard totalled 46. During the reporting period 175 pro- their legal representatives and the mediators is very much appreciated in this ceedings were entered in the List, including 28 by order. Ten proceedings were regard. removed by order of the Judge. Elapsed Times of Proceedings Finalised and Pending During the reporting period 118 cases were finalised as follows: An informal benchmark of nine months was set for the time between the • 90 cases (76%) were finalised without trial by settlement, dismissal by entry of a proceeding in the List and its finalisation. In earlier reports this bench- consent or by discontinuance by the parties; mark was set at 12 months. Of the 118 cases finalised during the reporting period, • 5 cases (4%) were settled or discontinued after trial was commenced; 98 (83%) were finalised within the nine month benchmark period. This compares • 8 cases (7%) were dismissed at trial favourably with 73 per cent in the previous reporting period. Of the 88 cases pend- • 15 (13%) cases were tried to judgment. ing on 30 June 2004, 16 (18.2%) had been in the List for 12 months or more since The number of cases pending at the end of the reporting period, on 30 June entry in the List, compared with 10 (21.7%) cases which had been in the List for 12 2004, totalled 88 compared with 60 pending on 30 June 2003. months or more on 31 December 2002.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 19 Building Cases List: Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004
50
40 TRIAL DIVISION: 30 20 COMMERCIAL AND 10 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04
At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised EQUITY DIVISION Pending at 30 June
Building Cases List Admiralty List The Principal Judge of the Building Cases List from 1 June 2003 until The Admiralty List is a list of civil cases which are brought under the 1 February 2004 was the Honourable Justice Mandie. The Principal Judge of the Admiralty Act 1998 (Cwlth) or which otherwise concern maritime commercial Building Cases List from 1 February 2004 until 30 June 2004 was the Honourable activities. The Principal Judge of the List and the Judge in Admiralty during the Justice Osborn. reporting period was the Honourable Justice Byrne. The Building Cases List comprises cases involving building or engineering The admiralty jurisdiction of the Court is one dating back to its establishment works of any description. This encompasses the: in the mid nineteenth century. It is, in terms of the number of cases, a modest part • design or carrying out of building works; of the work of the Division, but it is seen as an important part of the judicial service • supervision or inspection of construction; which the Court offers to the commercial community. • performance by an architect, designer, engineer, quantity surveyor or The Judge in Admiralty meets from time to time with an Admiralty List Users other expert of work related to building works. Group representing legal practitioners and insurance interests, which discusses matters of interest and advises the Judge as to improvements in the conduct of the How We Manage Cases List. The List is managed principally by directions given at monthly Building Case Directions Days. Alternative listing arrangements are accommodated where How We Manage Cases necessary. Cases in the List are both managed and tried by the Principal Judge of the Many building cases are capable of being settled out of court. The parties are List. Management of cases is achieved by listing the cases for directions as and encouraged to explore mediation and to produce joint reports of experts where when required. A characteristic of the management of cases in the List is the respect appropriate in order to resolve the issues between them. which is accorded to the special difficulties of parties and their practitioners who A number of substantial building cases were commenced during the reporting must prepare their cases. These include the difficulty of obtaining in a short time period. frame instructions from witnesses who are often mariners in distant ports or between ports and from clients who may be insurers or consortia of insurers in Case Statistics other countries. This means that the Judge does not subject them to the strict time The keeping of statistics was interrupted and the basis of case statistics pressures which are expected of parties in other managed lists. changed during the reporting period. As at January 2004 there were 39 matters in the List. During the period January 2004 to June 2004, 11 cases entered the List, Case Statistics four cases were disposed of and one matter was set down for trial. The number of At the start of the reporting period, on 1 January 2003, the number of pro- cases pending on 30 June 2004 was 42. ceedings in the List totalled five. During the period, six further proceedings were entered in the List and five were finalised by judgment after trial or by settlement. The number of cases pending as at 30 June 2004 was six. This is about the same number as were in the List during the previous reporting period.
Building Cases List Case Activity at a Glance Admiralty List Case Activity at a Glance Six months to Six months to 2003–04 30 June 2003 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings Number of Proceedings At Start of Reporting Period 36 39 At Start of Reporting Period 7 5 Entered into the List 11 15 Entered into the List 1 5 Finalised 4 14 Finalised 2 3 Set Down for Trial 1 4 Set Down for Trial - - Pending at 30 June 42 36 Pending at 30 June 6 7
20 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Admiralty List: Intellectual Property List: Victorian Taxation Apeals: Number of Proceedings – Number of Proceedings – Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 10 30 10 8 24 8 18 6 6 12 4 4 6 2 2
0 0 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised Pending at 30 June Pending at 30 June Pending at 30 June
Intellectual Property List Victorian Taxation Appeals List The Intellectual Property List, headed by Principal Judge the Honourable For the period 1 July 2003 to 1 February 2004 the Honourable Justice Harper Justice Harper, hears and determines cases involving a claim for breach of copy- was the Principal Judge of the Victorian Taxation Appeals List. On 2 February 2004 right, or of a trademark, or design, or a claim for the infringement of a patent. The the Honourable Justice Nettle took over the List until his appointment to the Court Principal Judge manages and, if possible, tries each individual case. of Appeal on 8 June 2004. Since then the List has been under the control of the Honourable Justice Hollingworth. How We Manage Cases The List hears and determines proceedings arising in the context of objections Parties may elect to enter the List when commencing proceedings or may be to an assessment, decision or determination by the Commissioner for State Revenue referred to the List by a Judge or a Master. A case may at any time be removed from in respect of liability for any tax, duty, levy, fee, charge or other impost. Proceedings the List. A summons for directions is issued and heard as soon as practicable before fall into the following categories: the Principal Judge of the List. There are no fixed directions days; instead directions • objections to a decision of the Commissioner of State Revenue, which are listed on a case by case basis in accordance with the convenience of the parties the objector has requested to be treated as an appeal to the Court; and of the Court. The Judge thereafter manages each case in the List in accordance • appeals on a question of law (including the application for leave to with its degree of complexity and so as to ensure that it is ready for hearing at the appeal) from an Order of the Victorian Civil and Administrative earliest possible time. This may include the hearing and determination of inter- Tribunal (VCAT) upon an objection; and locutory applications to amend pleadings, for further discovery and for security for • referrals of questions of law from VCAT arising in the review of a deci- costs. A directions hearing will generally be held shortly before trial to ensure that sion of the Commissioner of State Revenue on an objection. the parties are ready, that the issues are clear and that the trial runs smoothly and within the time limits allowed. The Judge is wherever possible the Trial Judge. How We Manage Cases There is, however, a general policy that cases in the List be referred to mediation The Principal Judge of the List heard all summonses for directions, interlocu- before a trial date is fixed. tory applications and most of the trials of the proceedings. Directions days were ordinarily held on the last Friday of every month, commencing at 9.30 a.m. On Case Statistics those days, the Judge heard applications for directions, applications for entry into At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- the List and applications for leave to appeal. ings waiting to be heard totalled four. Ten proceedings entered the List during the reporting period and the List finalised eight proceedings. The number of cases pend- Case Statistics ing on 30 June 2004 totalled six, compared with nine cases pending on 30 June 2003. At the start of the reporting period on 1 January 2003, the number of proceed- ings waiting to be heard totalled nine, 31 proceedings entered into the List during the reporting period and the List finalised 13 proceedings. The number of cases pending on 30 June 2004 totalled 27, compared with nine cases pending on 30 June 2003. Every effort was made to hear matters in a timely fashion to ensure that the length of time taken to resolve taxation matters remained as short as possible. Matters finalised represented a significant increase when compared with the previ- ous financial year. However the length of time taken to resolve matters in the List increased due to the recent filing of several appeals involving multiple appellants. The procedures adopted in the List are well suited to the nature of matters dealt with and continue to facilitate timely and efficient determinations.
Intellectual Property List Case Activity at a Glance Victorian Taxation Appeals List Case Activity at a Glance Six months to Six months to 2003–04 30 June 2003 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings Number of Proceedings At Start of Reporting Period 9 4 At Start of Reporting Period 9 9 Entered into the List 5 5 Entered into the List 28 3 Finalised 8 - Finalised 10 3 Pending at 30 June 6 9 Pending at 30 June 27 9
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 21 TRIAL DIVISION: COMMON LAW DIVISION
OVERVIEW How We Manage Common Law Cases The Common Law Division (CLD) hears and determines cases relating to a The Division kept up with work allocated for its disposition by the Listing wide range of common law proceedings, including: Master, who made regular and effective contact with the Principal Judge. Very few • proceedings founded in tort, or concurrently in tort and breach of con- cases that were fixed for trial were not reached. The Division processed single Judge tract or statutory breach; appeal work very quickly, with the average time taken from commencement to • claims by individuals to enforce securities; disposition remaining constant. • claims in debt; The Litigation Support Group and the Listing Master managed the work of • partnership disputes; the Division, except in the case of work in the Major Torts List and the Valuation, • professional disciplinary matters; Compensation and Planning List. During the reporting period, Judges who man- • industrial and employment law matters; aged the interlocutory work in those lists included Justices Bongiorno, Balmford • land law matters; and Osborn. In the Major Torts List, the Judge undertook directions and other inter- • property disputes between de facto partners (although transfer of such locutory work each second Friday and on other days as required. In the Valuation, disputes to Commonwealth jurisdiction was mooted in 2003); Compensation and Planning List, directions and interlocutory work was mainly • certain matters under the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness done on a monthly basis. to be Tried) Act 1997; Commitment to Circuit Work • administrative law proceedings; During the reporting period the Division kept its commitment to circuit work. • appeals from the Magistrates’ Court and most appeals from VCAT; The Division made Judges available for circuits, regardless of the caseload demand • appeals from decisions by other inferior Tribunals; and of the particular List. The profession was receptive to the Court’s commitment. • any appeals from County Court Masters. At the end of the reporting period the issue of standardising circuit interlocu- The Principal Judge, the Honourable Justice Ashley, headed the division tory procedures remained to be resolved. The Litigation Support Group managed during the reporting period. Judges who sat regularly in the Division during 2003 Civil work from some circuit towns and from other circuit towns mainly in the were Justices Smith, Ashley (Principal Judge), Gillard, Kellam, Bongiorno, Osborn, Major Torts List, creating an unevenness in management that required a remedy. A Nettle, Redlich and Williams. Justice Beach also sat in the Division until his retire- standard approach to dealing with interlocutory work was being investigated at the ment in early 2003, as did Justice Balmford until her resignation on 14 September end of the reporting period. 2003. The Court developed the procedure of holding separate circuits to differentiate Not all Judges who sat regularly in the Division sat in it exclusively through- between criminal and civil circuits. out the period. Justice Kellam was President of VCAT and was committed to hear- Jurisdictional Limit Costs Rule ings and administrative work until June 2003. In addition, he was a Deputy The Judges amended Rule 63.24 by inserting Rule 63.24(1.1), operative from Chairperson of the Adult Parole Board until 20 March 2003 when he was appointed 1 August 2003 and, as a consequence, amended Rule 63.24(1). The effect of Rule Chairperson. Further, many Judges sat for at least one term in another Division, 63.24(1.1) is to create a prima facie jurisdictional costs consequence in a proceed- particularly in the case of recently-appointed Judges. Generally, the Judges consid- ing for defamation where the amount recovered does not exceed $50,000. That rule ered it important to do some work across Divisions. addresses a disincentive to the commencement of defamation proceedings in this Of the Judges who sat in the Division throughout the year, Mr Justice Beach Court to which we referred in the last Annual Report. sat exclusively in the Practice Court until his retirement in early 2003. Despite his efficiency, his impending retirement had raised a concern whether a single Judge Major Judgments or Rulings could, and if so should, manage all Practice Court work. In addition to the concern In 2003 a number of very large matters were either finally disposed of, or were of the Court generally there was a question whether it would be appropriate for the otherwise the subject of major judgments or rulings. They involved, for example, Division to assume sole responsibility for providing the Practice Court Judge. proceedings arising from the Longford gas explosion, which were brought to a Those matters culminated in a decision that all Judges of the Trial Division substantial conclusion, and a series of rulings in Wintle v Stevedoring Industry should participate in Practice Court work on an equitable basis, generally doing Finance Committee and Anor, which eventually brought to an end litigation two weeks’ Practice Court work at a time. That arrangement worked very well. It that began in 1988 (see [1989] VR. 951). At the end of the reporting period a was a feature of such work that when the Practice Court Judge was overloaded, complex proceeding involving claims by 11 plaintiffs against 15 defendants, and a other Judges would step in and assist. counterclaim involving many parties, had already occupied 34 sitting days and had been the subject of many rulings.
22 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Major Torts List: List: Number of Proceedings – Number of Proceedings – 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 30 700
600 24
500 18 400
300 12
200 6 100
0 0 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 Six Months to 30 June 2003 2003–04 At Start of Reporting Period Filed Finalised At Start of Reporting Period Entered Finalised Pending at 30 June Pending at 30 June
Major Torts List Approximately 430 of the cases in the List consist of claims by passengers The Major Torts List is a managed List within the Common Law Division, against airlines and, in some cases, the Civil Aviation Safety Authority arising out which aims to apply appropriate case management techniques to major cases arising of the alleged contraction of deep vein thrombosis while travelling by air. The mainly, but not solely, within a tortious context. They include defamation cases, further progress of these cases will be significantly affected by a decision in the case claims for damages for personal injury (however caused), claims against govern- of Povey v Qantas & Ors which will be heard by the High Court in December 2004. ment bodies, institutions, lawyers, medical practitioners, engineers, accountants and There are still approximately 32 cases in the List arising from the members of other professions, product liability claims and miscellaneous other torts. collision between HMAS Voyager and HMAS Melbourne in 1964. These cases, Cases are subjected to a directions process where a timetable is fixed with a view which have been beset by difficulties, are gradually being disposed of by trial. to ensuring that necessary interlocutory processes are undertaken as efficiently as However, their rate of progress is such that they will not all be finally determined possible and are limited to those really required to achieve a just result. In many for some time yet. cases a trial date is fixed early in the process. In all cases parties have ready access to Valuation, Compensation and Planning List the Principal Judge of the List for contested interlocutory hearings, which can be The Honourable Justice Balmford was the Principal Judge of the Valuation, scheduled outside normal court hours when necessary. Parties are encouraged to Compensation and Planning List until 29 September 2003. The Honourable Justice reach agreement on an appropriate timetable for interlocutory steps, although the Osborn then took over management of the List. Court supervises those timetables to ensure that the proceeding moves towards resolu- The Valuation, Compensation and Planning List hears and determines tion at an appropriate pace. cases relating to valuation of land, compensation for the acquisition of land and Almost all cases are referred to alternative dispute resolution, usually media- planning appeals, together with other matters involving land use and environment tion, as soon as their state of preparation permits. Mediation produces a reasonably protection. high rate of settlement and even in those cases where a settlement is not reached At first instance, the Planning List of the Victorian Civil and Administrative the fact that a mediation process has been undertaken often facilitates a settlement Tribunal (VCAT) deals with most planning matters. Section 148 of the Victorian at a later point in time. Cases that do not resolve before trial are tried by Judges of Civil and Administrative Tribunal Act 1998 provides that a party to a proceeding the Common Law Division, either with or without a jury as the case requires. may, with leave of the Court, appeal to this Court, on a question of law, from an As in all litigation, the speed with which cases in this List are resolved depends order of VCAT. not only on the Court’s capacity to process them, but also upon the efficiency with The List principally accommodates appeals on questions of law, which are which solicitors and counsel undertake necessary interlocutory steps. generally short in duration (one to two days) and valuation and compensation Notwithstanding the educative effect, which the widespread use of Court cases, which are potentially lengthy. Settlement is encouraged in valuation cases by management of cases has achieved, there is still an unacceptable minority of cases mediation and the use of joint expert reports. This process has achieved significant where inefficiency, or incompetence of the lawyers involved, leads to increased costs success during the period under report. and waste of time. The incapacity or unwillingness of some legal practitioners to agree on even simple procedural arrangements, the pursuit by some of inappropri- The provisions of the Valuation of Land Act 1960 were placed under review by the ate interlocutory processes and non-compliance with orders are some of the prob- State Government during the reporting period. This process may in due course lems. They are being addressed by the gradual education of practitioners involved affect the statutory requirements pursuant to which valuation cases are conducted. and, in extreme cases, by the use of self-executing orders, where a party’s case may Case Statistics be automatically terminated for procedural non-compliance, leaving the legal The keeping of statistics was interrupted and the basis of case statistics practitioner potentially liable to his or her client. changed during the reporting period. As at January 2004 there were 24 matters in Case Statistics the List. During the period January 2004 to June 2004 seven matters were entered Subject to the comments that follow, the table below provides an overview of into the List. Of these 31 proceedings, 14 were VCAT appeals, 16 were valuation and compensation matters, and one was a challenge to the validity of a rezoning and the number of cases in the Major Torts List over the period relevant to this Annual compulsory acquisition. Seven matters were disposed of during the reporting period Report. including one appeal from VCAT. Major Torts List Case Activity Valuation, Compensation and Planning List Case Activity Six months to Six months to 2003–04 30 June 2003 2003–04 30 June 2003 Number of Proceedings Number of Proceedings At Start of Reporting Period 633 428 At Start of Reporting Period 12 8 Entered into the List 51 290 Entered into the List 19 9 Finalised or Referred to Listing Master 47 85 Finalised or Referred to Listing Master 7 5 Pending at 30 June 637 633 Pending at 30 June 24 12
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 23 Judge of the Criminal Division Justice Coldrey.
TRIAL DIVISION: CRIMINAL
Judges in the Criminal Division of the Trial Division hear and determine The Judges in the Criminal Division are aware of the need to take part in all cases of murder and attempted murder, as well as other selected major criminal continuing judicial education programs. Most Judges are well versed in the use of trials. As at 30 June 2004, the Judges of the Criminal Division comprised Justices advanced technology. Courses have been provided, and utilised, to advance the Teague (Principal Judge), Cummins, Coldrey, Kellam and Redlich. In addition, skills of Judges in various aspects of new uses of such technology. Individual Judges, Judges from other Divisions preside over criminal trials. Normally, six Judges are mainly at their own expense, engage in international and interstate comparative assigned to preside over criminal trials. Usually criminal matters come to the analysis of criminal procedures. Work is being undertaken by the Australian Supreme Court after a committal hearing in the Magistrates' Court. Institute of Judicial Administration with our support on improving the quality of directions to juries. OVERVIEW The Criminal Division is aware of the desirability of criminal trials being During the reporting period, the Division experienced an increase in the open to the public to the maximum possible extent. The courts for criminal trials volume and complexity of cases, the length of one major trial and a number of are open. Public access is encouraged, as is the reporting of proceedings in the retrials. media. The Law List gives details of trials. Judges of the Division consulted with legal representatives who expressed their Judges from the Criminal Division sit on the Adult Parole Board and the concerns, particularly with regard to: Forensic Leave Panel, a burden which reduces their availability for trials, but adds • adjournments due to a lack of judicial resources; considerably to the confidence that the public can have in the fairness and justice • a need for the Court to hear the most difficult cases not falling within provided to prisoners in the corrections area and forensic patients in the mental the Court’s exclusive jurisdiction. health area. The key objective of the Criminal Division of the Court is the fair and timely trial of all exclusive jurisdiction and other complex criminal cases. Strict monitor- HOW WE MANAGE CASES ing of cases awaiting trial is effected through the Criminal Listing Directorate, the Staff of the Criminal Trial Listing Directorate (CTLD) manage criminal cases Principal Judge, Directions Hearings and focused Final Directions Hearings. Cases in Victoria by: are managed where appropriate. There are regular meetings of Judges sitting in the • providing a listing service for all criminal cases in the Supreme Court; Division, sometimes with representatives of the Office of Public Prosecutions, the • managing case scheduling in an efficient, effective and timely manner; Victorian Bar, the Law Institute and Victoria Legal Aid. Much good use is made of • delivering impartial, consistent and responsive services of a high the Courts’ Information Officer. Detailed monthly lists are routinely provided to the standard to all Court users and the community; and Chief Justice and other Principal Judges for oral comment and criticism. • providing administrative support and advice, including statistical and There was a reduction in the number of cases awaiting trial between January case management information, to the judiciary and the Department of 2003 and July 2004. During that period several longer and difficult ‘covert police Justice (DOJ). technique’ murder trials were conducted. Under Chief Justice Warren, there has Case Conferences been the development of a more focused Final Directions procedure, and greater A CTLD officer holds a case conference, attended by lawyers for the prosecu- attention has been given to the consideration of accepting more complex cases not tion and defence, to ensure that the matter is ready for trial. The conference pro- within the Court’s exclusive jurisdiction. vides the opportunity for the parties to reply to various questions and to discuss any At the end of the period, there were several worrying indicators of pressure on other issues that a party may wish to raise. Once the CTLD officer receives these the Criminal Division to deal with a greater number of trials and many more com- replies at the conference, he or she refers the proposed trial/plea date to the plex trials, some arising out of ‘police corruption’ and ‘gangland killings’ in Principal Judge in readiness for the directions hearing in the Supreme Court. Victoria. There is no indication of any slackening in the number of ‘routine trials’. Directions Hearing Without an increase in the number of Judges sitting in the Criminal Division, and If a matter is ready for trial, the Principal Judge assigns a date for trial at a without other increases in resources, the Division would not be able to handle all monthly directions hearing. looming trials.
24 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Nature of Criminal Applications—2003–04
Bail Act Listening Devices Act Crimes Act (Other) Other Applications
Final Directions Hearing Criminal Case Statistics at a Glance The Judge assigned to preside over the trial holds a final directions hearing to Six months to detail the requirements to be addressed prior to the date fixed for trial. The final 2003–04 30 June 2003 Criminal Trials (Melbourne) directions hearing is held approximately a week before the fixed trial date. Trials 73 28 CASE STATISTICS Pleas of Guilty 22 17 Total 95 45 The following information details the case statistics for the Trial Division: Criminal Trials (Circuit) Criminal during the reporting period. Trials 8 4 Pleas of Guilty 1 2 Criminal Trials – Melbourne Total 9 6 The number of criminal proceedings held at Melbourne during the reporting Criminal Applications Filed Under period totalled 140, comprising 101 trials and 39 pleas of guilty. • Bail Act 1977 51 31 • Listening Devices Act 1969 135 57 Criminal Trials – Circuit • Section 35 of Crimes (Mental Impairment The number of criminal proceedings held at circuit courts during the report- and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 - 3 ing period totalled 15, comprising 12 trials and three pleas of guilty. • Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997 84 Criminal Applications • Other 20 9 The number of criminal applications filed during the reporting period Total 214 104 totalled 318. Court users filed the majority of applications under the Listening Devices Act 1969, totalling 192, followed by 82 applications filed under the Bail Act 1977. Other applications filed included 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. Time Taken to Finalise Criminal Proceedings The Court aims to achieve the following benchmarks with regard to the elapsed time taken to finalise criminal proceedings: • We fix the median elapsed time from the date of committal to the date of disposition at nine months. • We fix the 90th percentile elapsed time from the date of committal to the date of disposition at 12 months. • Subject to the provisions of section 353(2) and (3) of the Crimes Act 1958 and the Crimes (Procedure) Regulations 1994, we aim to finalise 100 per cent of cases within 12 months from the date of com- mittal. The Court’s ability to meet these benchmarks may be affected by issues relating to additional complexity, limited availability of circuit courts, the granting of legal aid, availability of witnesses and forensic material, and related trials and appeals.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 25 MASTERS
OVERVIEW Because three of the General Masters also hold specialist office and Master Dowling, since his appointment, has been specially attached to civil appeals to the Court of The Masters of the Supreme Court hold judicial office. Like the Judges, they sit Appeal, the only General Masters who spend the whole of their time in discharging in Court. The Constitution Act 1975, section 75(2) provides that ‘(t)he Court consists the duties of the office are Master Evans and Master Wheeler. of the Judges of the Court and the Masters of the Court’. Thus, the members of the Court are the Judges and the Masters. Masters must be practitioners of the Court of When the Trial Division was itself separated into Divisions Master Evans was not less than five years’ standing. attached to the Commercial and Equity Division and Master Wheeler to the Like Judges, Masters are appointed by the Governor-in-Council and have the Common Law Division. Accordingly, they are the primary Masters to hear and same conditions of tenure and the same pension entitlements. The Masters carry out determine applications in their respective Divisions. When necessary, however, they judicial functions in the civil jurisdiction of the Court which would have to be per- continue to assist one another in the disposition of cases before them so as to formed by the Judges if there were no Masters. Thus, the Masters assist the Judges in ensure that cases set down to be heard on a day are heard on that day. discharging the civil jurisdiction of the Court. Two of the specialist Masters, the Listing Master and the Taxing Master, were There are presently seven Masters who hold between them six different offices assigned to the Commercial and Equity Division and the Common Law Division, with one Master combining three, and two others two. The duties of the various respectively. When their other duties permit, they assist in the disposition of offices are dealt with hereunder in the order in which the offices were created in the ‘Masters’ cases’ in those Divisions. Court. Further, it is in his capacity as a General Master that Master Bruce, the Taxing Taxing Master Master, controls cases pending in the List known as the Litigation Support Group Master Bruce is only the fifth Taxing Master to have held this office since 1905. (LSG). This means that once a week he gives directions in proceedings in the List Having been appointed Taxing Master in 1973, he has been for several years the and exercises overall supervision of those proceedings until they are ready to be senior member of the Court in terms of service. fixed for trial. For this he needs, and has, the support of his Associate and two other The functions of the Taxing Master are to carry out the judicial function of part-time staff. assessing bills of lawyers’ costs, both in respect of costs ordered by the Court, includ- In addition to her duties as Listing Master, Master Kings, sitting as a General ing the Court of Appeal, to be paid by one party to the other and costs as between a Master, hears and determines nearly all of the applications to a Master which are solicitor and his or her client. In these days of ‘mega’ litigation, bills of costs in the made in proceedings after they have been allotted a date for trial. The rationale for Court can involve millions of dollars; and frequently the ‘taxations’ which proceed this is that the outcome of such applications frequently has an impact on the trial before the Taxing Master involve complex or delicate points. and the date fixed for the trial, for which Master Kings, as Listing Master, has Other Masters are empowered to assist the Taxing Master and Master Cain has responsibility. Master Kings also hears applications for preliminary discovery and acted in this capacity to the extent that his duties in the Court of Appeal and other- discovery from a third party and applications to set aside subpoenas. wise as a ‘General Master’ permit. Master Cain, the Registrar of Criminal Appeals since 2001, has been occupied General Master nearly full-time with the duties of that office, but has nevertheless made time to The office of ‘Master of the Supreme Court’ was created with effect from the begin- assist with General Masters’ work and assisting the Taxing Master when that has ning of 1949 when two previous offices, those of ‘Master in Equity’ (est. 1852 when been needed and possible. the Court commenced) and ‘Chief Clerk’ (est. 1884) were abolished. When Master Master Dowling has acted as a General Master in the Trial Division usually when, a Dowling QC was appointed in 2001, he was the fifteenth person to hold office as a General Master being absent, his other duties with respect to civil proceedings in the ‘Master of the Supreme Court’. Presently, all Masters, other than the Senior Master, Court of Appeal have permitted. hold this office. This is due to the appointment to the office in 1993 of the Taxing Master, the then Registrar of Criminal Appeals, and the Listing Master in place of Senior Master Master Barker who had died in office in 1992 and not been replaced. The office of Senior Master was created in 1977 so that one of the Masters would be The functions of the General Master are to hear and determine civil cases which are responsible for administering and coordinating the judicial business of the Masters not within the exclusive jurisdiction of the Judges of the Trial Division. The actual and taking responsibility for the funds held in Court by order of the Court or under division of the work is not without complexity but, generally, it may be said that the an Act (generally, for persons under a disability). General Masters hear and determine those cases which arise before trial and after The first Senior Master, Charles Jacobs, O B E, had been a General Master for 16 trial. years when appointed. The appointment simply added to his responsibilities and he continued to perform the duties of a General Master. While not a General Master, the Senior Master has the same jurisdiction as a General Master and, subject to his other duties, exercises it.
26 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Senior Master Mahony is responsible for the administration of the business of the Registrar of Criminal Appeals Masters, which means not only the administration and coordination of the judicial This office was created in 1982 when Master Gaffney, who retired in 2001, was business of the General Masters but also, as was the case in the time of his predeces- appointed. He and the then Chief Justice, the Honourable Sir John Young, devised sor, for matters affecting the Masters generally or a particular Master or an issue methods as a result of which the process of criminal appeals in the Court was affecting Masters or a particular Master. streamlined, with the result that the disposition of criminal appeals became the most efficient in Australia. The Senior Master is also ultimately responsible for all activities of the Senior The Court of Criminal Appeal (as the Full Court sitting in its criminal juris- Master’s (Funds in Court) Office. This is a responsibility which imposes daily obli- diction was then known) became able to hear and determine appeals without the gations. The functions and personnel of the Office are the subject of the report on need for adjournments which had previously been experienced, especially as the page 29 detailing the Senior Master’s (Funds in Court) Office. In his judicial capac- result of appellants in person seeking legal aid or legal representation or further ity the Senior Master ordinarily determines all applications by or for beneficiaries time to prepare. This was achieved through active liaison with appellants or their for payments out of Court from funds held for them. Such orders are made daily. legal practitioners, the Legal Aid Commission, the Office of the Director of Public The Senior Master is also attached to the Commercial and Equity Division. In that Prosecutions, and counsel and solicitors retained with respect to the appeal. Gaol capacity he hears and determines most ‘Corporations’ cases which are within the visits were made regularly by the Registrar. Masters’ jurisdiction, including winding up and related proceedings and applica- The result was that preparation of appeals was vastly improved and appeals tions to set aside statutory demands. Because of his other duties, the Senior Master which were fixed for hearing by the Registrar were ready for hearing. presently is able to sit in court only on three days each week and, since it has been The Registrar of Criminal Appeals also heard and determined various appli- found beneficial for the same judicial officer to hear winding up proceedings and cations relating to appeals, the most frequent and significant being applications for because other applications before Masters may not, because of his other duties, be leave to amend the grounds of appeal. disposed of as efficiently by the Senior Master as they are by other Masters, he has Registrar of the Court of Appeal determined that it is in the ‘Corporations’ jurisdiction that he should sit. This office was created when the Court of Appeal was instituted in 1995. It was Listing Master provided that a person may hold the office of Registrar of Criminal Appeals and the The office of Listing Master was created in 1977 so that there would be a spe- office of Registrar of the Court of Appeal at the same time. Master Cain is the second cialist judicial officer responsible for the fixing of dates for trial before the Judges Registrar of the Court of Appeal and Registrar of Criminal Appeals. Master Gaffney and the drawing up, maintenance and coordination of lists of such cases, and to was the first. ensure to the greatest extent possible the smooth flow of proceedings to trial, and to The Registrar continues the work hitherto carried out by the Registrar of maximise the efficient use of Judges’ time, of courts, and of other resources of the Criminal Appeals; has general responsibility for the Registry of the Court of Appeal; Court. is in constant liaison with the President and has frequent contact with the other Master Kings has carried out these duties since 1993. They are such as to Judges of the Court of Appeal; and is responsible for all matters arising in the civil involve the full-time assistance of a secretary, and a further assistant as well as her jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal, including applications to a Master. The first Associate. Many communications with legal practitioners and litigants in person Registrar, Master Gaffney, was relieved of the actual burden with respect to civil have to be made. Master Kings herself, among other things, has to ensure that she appeals when Master Cain was appointed a General Master in November 1996; and is informed as to the results of all communications made for her by her staff and Master Cain having been appointed as the Registrar of the Court of Appeal and the usually makes her own inquiries as to what Judges will be available for cases that Registrar of Criminal Appeals in 2001, Master Dowling QC was soon after appoint- are pending and, in this, she must be attentive to the workload borne by individual ed, in effect, to replace Master Cain with respect to the civil work of the Court of Judges. This can involve considerable time in communications with the Judges, and Appeal. their Associates. Since the creation of Divisions in the Trial Division there has been a further nuance in this activity as there is now a smaller ‘pool’ of Judges available depending on the Division in which a proceeding has been placed. Also in conse- quence of this, the Listing Master frequently meets with the Chief Justice and the Judges who are the Heads of the respective Divisions. Master Kings also actively assists the Judge in Charge of Long Cases and regularly gives directions in such proceedings. She also gives directions in other proceedings which will promote their progress to trial. (Especially is this so in cases involving plaintiffs suffering from recently-detected terminal mesothelioma, which must be brought to trial as a matter of extreme urgency while safeguarding the right of the defendant to justice.)
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 27 MASTERS
STATISTICS (TRIAL DIVISION) THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE During the extended period of this Report there has been a steady increase in The Senior Master nearly all areas of the Masters’ work in the Trial Division. The traditional way of On 1 July 2004, the Courts Legislation (Funds in Court) Act 2004 came into measuring this has been in terms of orders made. That suffices for the limited pur- force. Pursuant to that Act, unless it is otherwise ordered in a particular case, all pose stated but it does not show up other significant variations, such as increases in funds then held in the County Court, the Magistrates’ Court and the Victims of complexity and demands on time. Further there are other matters to be taken into Crime Assistance Tribunal for persons under disability are to be paid into the account in considering the statistics of orders made. These are referred to after the Supreme Court to be held by the Senior Master. Further, unless it is otherwise following table of those statistics. ordered in a particular case, the moneys to be paid for such a person under a judg- Masters’ Work (Trial Division) ment or order of those Courts or an order of that Tribunal in a proceeding deter- 1/1/03– 1/7/03– 1/1/04– mined after 1 July 2004, are also to be paid into the Supreme Court to be held by 30/6/03 31/12/03 30/6/04 the Senior Master. In every such case of payment into the Court, the Act provides Corporations 736 858 839 that the Senior Master is to hold the money ‘as if an order had been made in a General 2,397 2,507 2,610 proceeding in the Supreme Court that the money be paid into court to be held on Funds in Court 2,079 2,166 2,439 behalf of a person under disability and as if that money had been paid into court in Listing 634 425 634 accordance with that order’. This means that in all those cases the same procedures Litigation Support Group 1,969 2,310 2,386 Assessment of Costs 487 532 507 will be followed concerning applications for orders etc. Total 8,302 8,798 9,415 This legislative initiative will mean that in the next one or two reporting periods the number of beneficiaries for whom the Senior Master holds funds will be The totals in each category show the simple increases of case load measured multiplied by a factor of approximately four, and each year thereafter increase. by orders made. The following matters should be noted: This will have an obvious effect not only on the operations of the Senior • The first half of the calendar year 2003 should be compared with the Master’s (Funds in Court) Office (dealt with elsewhere in this Annual Report) but first half of 2004. Because of the Long Vacation extending through also on the capacity of the Senior Master to continue to discharge both his role as a January for most judicial officers, sitting time is less in the first half Master sitting in the Trial Division in both ‘Corporations’ matters and as the Master than the second half of a year. usually making the orders required with respect to Funds in Court matters, and also • In previous Annual Reports, ‘Corporations’ cases have been included in his non-delegable (save in times of absence) administrative functions with respect the ‘General’ class. It is considered that they should be identified sepa- to the Funds in Court. rately as they form a distinct and significant section of the Masters’ business. Master Bruce on Sick Leave • Most applications for orders with respect to Funds in Court are made Early in the current financial year, Master Bruce had to undergo urgent and informally through the Senior Master’s (Funds in Court) Office. No spe- serious surgery. This substantially coincided with Master Wheeler’s absence on cific statistics are kept of applications which are refused. Orders refusing Long Leave. In consequence Master Kings added further to her workload by also applications are not prepared unless the person affected expresses a acting as the Master concerned with LSG, and Master Cain, Master Dowling and the determination to appeal to a Judge. This is rare. It not infrequently Senior Master also contributed in other areas. occurs that applications which are refused are, in effect, replaced by The Retirement of Master Wheeler other modified applications until an order is made. In any given period, Master Wheeler must retire no later than 17 February 2005. He was appointed however, there will be applications which are refused and taken no fur- in July 1990 to replace Master George Brett who had retired in September 1988. The ther. 22-month ‘hiatus’ had placed great burdens on the other ‘General’ Masters of the day. Having regard to the increasing work burden being borne by the Masters which is partly illustrated by the Table above, it is sincerely hoped that a new Master will be appointed to replace Master Wheeler as from 18 February 2005 or as soon as pos- sible thereafter.
28 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report FUNDS IN COURT
BACKGROUND GROWTH The Senior Master’s (Funds in Court) Office [the Office] is a discrete, self- The work of the Office continues to grow in volume and significance over time. funded, administrative division of the Court. All funds paid into Court are held, As the funds held for persons under disability constitute 95 per cent of the funds and invested, and administered by the Senior Master, who is a judicial member of the assets held by the Senior Master, these funds cause most of the work of the Office. Court. The Senior Master holds funds, investments and assets, principally for per- Office workload statistics are compiled on a calendar year basis through the Office sons under disability, the value of which is in excess of $600 million. Funds that are computer system, called TMS (Trust Management System). The statistics for the last not held for persons under disability are held pursuant to orders of the Court, or two calendar years are as follows: pursuant to various statutory provisions. The Senior Master discharges his responsi- Funds in Court Workload Statistics – 2002–03 to 2003–04 bilities with respect to the funds through the services of the staff of the various dis- 2003 2002 crete sections of the Office, being Funds Administration, Accounting and Taxation, Orders* made: 4,186 4,179 Client Liaison, Investment, Legal, and Information Technology, and also through Documents prepared: 9,244 9,057 the services of external consultants and other specialist advisers, e.g., the members Payments made: 18,124 16,700 of the Investment Review Panel. Financial transactions recorded (payments made, receipts, and the like): 66,823 61,938 MISSION STATEMENT *Payments out of Court are made pursuant to orders of the Court. The Senior Master usually constitutes The Mission Statement of the Office is: the Court when these orders are made. The orders are prepared and, after authentication, processed within the Office. “To administer prudently and efficiently for and on behalf of clients of the Staff numbers have continued to grow over time to cope with this increased Office the funds in Court and assets purchased from them in a manner, workload. The Senior Master monitors the time taken by staff, from the date of receipt consistent with the law, that is in their best interests.” of a request for funds or of an invoice for payment, until the matter is referred to him FINANCIAL REPORTING for consideration, or until payment is effected. The Financial Reports of the Senior Master are audited, on a Financial Year TMS basis, by the Auditor-General of the State of Victoria. The Special Purpose Financial Continuous improvements are made to TMS to facilitate processing the volume Reports, and Audit Opinions of the Auditor-General, for the years ended 30 June 2003 of work received. In the recent past, barcoding of all documents created within TMS, and 30 June 2004 are included within this Annual Report. and the barcoding of all external documents (by staff affixing barcode stickers upon CLIENTS receipt), has enabled ready access to documents by use of barcode ‘zappers’. In turn, use of barcodes has brought about the use of DocEazy. This facility enables all The persons under disability for whom the Senior Master holds funds are incoming documentation (letters, invoices, notices, etc.) in respect of any client to be minors (in respect of whom most dealings are with their parents) and persons over easily viewed, without need for recourse to the physical Office file. Use of DocEazy has the age of 18 years, but who have sustained compensable injuries, usually severe, also enabled all ledger cards, on which records of funds paid into Court were kept causing acquired brain injury (ABI). There is personal contact with them (where prior to the commencement of TMS in June 1992, to be scanned (over many months) possible) and with their relatives, carers and other interested persons. Therefore, into a database. This database can be searched in the name of the client, or the pro- Office staff receive regular training to deal sympathetically and helpfully with the ceeding number in the Court, and the relevant ledger cards viewed. As such, since consequences of ABI to ensure that clients’ best interests are furthered and promoted early 2003, records of all funds paid into Court from approximately 1950 may be in a cooperative manner. readily accessed via use of TMS and DocEazy. In respect of funds which are not held for persons under disability, most deal- ings are with legal practitioners or members of the public seeking access to the funds. The Office Legal Section assists such inquiries, providing advice and guidance as required. When orders for payment out of such funds are made by the Court, should the order so provide, the Legal Section generally prepares, and sees to the authentica- tion of, such orders. Taxation consequences are then finalised, and payments are effected as expeditiously as possible.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 29 FUNDS IN COURT
CLIENT SURVEYS The Act, in effect, recognises the superior services afforded to clients by the Office. Recognition of the high quality of service afforded by the Office extends even Continuous improvement of service to clients is a significant motivation for the to the floor of the Legislative Assembly of the Parliament of Victoria. During the sec- staff of the Office. A survey of the clients of the Office was undertaken by Ernst and ond reading debate of the Courts Legislation (Funds in Court) Bill on 11 May 2004, Young for the Senior Master in May 2003. This is the third client survey undertaken the Bill enjoyed unanimous support in both Houses. In the Assembly, Mr Hulls, the by Ernst and Young for the Senior Master since 1999. Ernst and Young randomly Attorney-General, noted that support, and that the Bill was intended to ensure “that select clients to be interviewed and receive any responses. The results were compiled people under disability and whose funds are managed by the courts receive the best and communicated to the Senior Master in June 2003. Respondents were asked to possible services and returns for their funds”. Mr McIntosh, the Shadow Attorney- rate their level of satisfaction from 1 to 7 to 19 questions. Ernst and Young consider General, referred to the Office as “one of the great success stories of Victorian courts”. that a response of 5 or above to be positive. The results were very satisfactory again. He also referred to the financial advisers to the Senior Master as having performed “a Each of the previous surveys was also very positive. In the 2003 survey, 17 out of 19 singularly superb job in managing (the) funds for the benefit of (the) people” under questions resulted in median responses of at least 6, and average responses to all 19 disability. questions of at least 5.1, on the 7-point scale. The survey also identified a number of outcomes which clients wanted. A letter, FUTURE CHALLENGE accompanying the first six-monthly statement (one of the outcomes identified), was While the transfers brought about by the Act will no doubt tax the capacity of posted to all clients in January 2004. The letter advised clients that the desired out- the Senior Master, and of the staff of the Office, to cope with the substantially comes identified by the survey would be carried out, being that they: increased workload, it is strongly intended that the work concerned will be dispatched • would like to receive statements more frequently; with the usual efficiency, prudence and concern, with which the funds in Court have • would like more information about investments held for them; been administered to date. This will represent a challenge. However, it is trusted that, • are unsure as to how to make a complaint about Office services; and with continuous improvement in computer technology and staff training and devel- • would like to have Client Surveys conducted every two years. opment, the Office will be up to the challenge. The Senior Master and Office staff will The letter advised how information as to investments held for clients could be also endeavour to ensure that clients of the Office will be advantaged by the outcome; obtained from staff of the Office Investments Section. The letter also reiterated detail and certainly that none is disadvantaged. concerning the Office complaint procedure. The letter advised that Client Surveys would be conducted every two years. FURTHER INFORMATION THE COURTS LEGISLATION A detailed explanation of the Office and how the funds in Court may be (FUNDS IN COURT) ACT [THE accessed is included within the Supreme Court website. ACT] CONCLUSION The Act is Act No. 30 of 2004 and came into effect on 1 July 2004. It transfers to The Court, in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction parens patriae, can the control of the Senior Master nearly all funds presently held for persons under justifiably be proud of the work which the Office does, especially for and on behalf disability by the County and Magistrates’ Courts and by the Victims of Crime of persons under disability. Assistance Tribunal (VoCAT). It is estimated that this will mean that the funds of approximately 4,000 further clients will be transferred to the Senior Master for administration. As at 30 June 2004, the Senior Master administered funds for approx- imately 1,300 clients. The Act also provides for payment to the Senior Master of near- ly all funds ordered by those courts for any person under disability after 30 June 2004 and, similarly, any award of assistance made by VoCAT for such a person after that date.
30 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report COURT GOVERNANCE
COUNCIL OF JUDGES The Rules Committee met on 29 occasions during the reporting period. As a result of its work the Council of Judges made the Rules of Court set out in the table The Council of Judges is established under Section 28 of the Supreme Court on page 32 and as described below: Act 1986, which requires the Council to meet at least once each year to: • The Judges of the Supreme court amended Chapter I of the Rules of the • consider the operation of the Act and the Rules; Supreme Court relating to the Supreme Court (General Civil Procedure • consider the workings of the offices of the Court and the arrangements Rules) 1996). The Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No 23) Rules relating to the duties of the officers of the Court; and 2003 made miscellaneous amendments to the Principal Rules provid- • inquire into and examine any defects that appear to exist in the system ing that a deposition taken under Part 1 of Order 41 of the Principal of procedure or the administration of the law in the Court and in any Rules remains confidential until admitted into evidence. other court from which an appeal lies to the Court. • The Supreme Court (Chapter II Amendment No 5) Rules 2003 amended The Council meets (where possible) at the end of each month and considers a the Principal Rules consequent upon the enactment of the Juries Act 2000 wide range of policy and practice issues that affect the operations of the Court and and the Electoral Act 2002 concerning appeals from tribunals and appli- the administration of justice generally. cations to have persons dealt in a summary way under section 81 of the Rules made by the Council of Judges are described under ‘Rules Committee’ Juries Act for not attending when summoned under section 27 of that Act. and set out in the table on page 32. • The Supreme Court Chapter I Amendment No. 24 Rule makes a minor RULES COMMITTEE amendment to Rule 44.02(2) of Chapter I to make it clear that Order Under section 25 of the Supreme Court Act 1986, the Judges of the Court 44, as in force immediately before 1 August 2003 continued to apply to have power to make Rules of the Court with respect to a wide range of matters, a person engaged as an expert before 1 November 2003. including any matter relating to the practice and procedure of the Court. In the first • The Judges of the Supreme Court made new Rules, the Supreme Court instance, the Council of Judges delegates the task of investigating the need for new (Corporations) Rules 2003. These Rules replace the Supreme Court or amended rules and drafting rules to the Rules Committee, which makes recom- (Corporations) Rules 1999 and constitute a new Chapter V of the Rules. mendations to the Council of Judges for any rule changes. The new Rules were made to be in harmony with the like rules in all The members of the Rules Committee as at 30 June 2004 were as follows: the other States and Territories, but the preliminary purpose was to sub- • Judicial Members – Justice Buchanan (Chairman), Mr Justice J D stitute reference to the Corporations Act 2001 (Cwlth) for references to Phillips, Justice Nettle, Justice Harper and Justice Kaye the former Corporations Law and otherwise to make necessary alter- • Appointed Members – Senior Master Mahony ations to the Rules to conform with the Corporations Act 2000 (Cwlth). • Appointed by the Council of Judges – Mr N J Williams Q C • The Supreme Court (Chapter VI Amendment No 4) Rules 2003 amend • Nominated by the Bar Council – Mr N Mukhtar Q C the Principal Rules to make provision for applications and covert search • Nominated by the Victorian Law Institute – Mr C Dale warrants under the Terrorism (Community Protection) Act 2003. • Parliamentary Counsel Secretary – Ms Jayne Atkins • The Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No 25) Rules 2003 amend the Principal Rules to substitute Appendices A and B to the Principal Rules, which provides for the scale of costs.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 31 COURT GOVERNANCE
• Chapter I of the Rules was amended by three sets of Rules. The first Rules Committee Meetings Rule, Amendment No. 26, dealt with notification to the parties to Member proceedings and amendment of Court documents consequent upon a Members as of 1 January 2003: change of name by a corporation, the form of notices of appeal and Mr Justice J D Phillips (Chair) Mr Justice Ormiston consent to judgments or orders by parties not in attendance. The second Justice Harper Rule, Amendment No. 27, amended Appendices A and B of the scales of Justice Hansen costs, increasing them by 1.93 per cent and 1.84%, respectively. The Justice Nettle third Rule, Amendment No. 28, made new provisions for fixing a date Senior Master Mahony Mr N J Williams Q C (appointed by Council of Judges) for trial to reflect case management by Judges. Mr N Mukhtar Q C (nominated by Bar Council) • Chapter II of the Rules was amended to provide new Rules for the Mr Chris Dale (nominated by Victorian Law Institute) appointment of Senior Counsel by the Chief Justice. Members as of 31 December 2004: • Chapter III, the Administration and Probate Rules, was due to expire Justice Buchanan (Chair) Mr Justice J D Phillips and was replaced with a set of Rules that were essentially the same as Justice Harper the old Rules. Chapter III was also amended with respect to affidavits Justice Nettle supporting applications for grants of representation and to give further Justice Kaye powers to the Court and the Registrar with respect to applications for Senior Master Mahony Mr N J Williams Q C (appointed by Council of Judges) grants for administration. Mr N Mukhtar Q C (nominated by Bar Council) • Chapter VI was amended to alter the procedure relating to criminal Mr Chris Dale (nominated by Victorian Law Institute) appeals to the Court of Appeal. Rules of Court During 2004 Justice Ormiston retired after 25 years’ service on the Committee, Rule Date and Justice Phillips, J A retired after 17 years’ service. Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 23) Rules 2003 31 July 2003 Supreme Court (Chapter II Amendment No. 5) Rules 2003 31 July 2003 Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 24) Rules 2003 28 August 2003 Supreme Court (Corporations) Rules 2003 25 September 2003 Supreme Court (Chapter VI Amendment No. 4) Rules 2003 25 September 2003 Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 25) Rules 2003 25 November 2003 Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 26) Rules 2002 29 July 2004 Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 27) Rules 2004 25 November 2004 Supreme Court (Chapter I Amendment No. 28) Rules 2004 25 November 2004 Supreme Court (Chapter II Amendment No. 6) Rules 2004 28 October 2004 Supreme Court (Administration and Probate) Rules 2004 27 May 2004 Supreme Court (Chapter III Amendment No. 8) Rules 2004 29 April 2004 Supreme Court (Chapter VI Amendment No. 5) Rules 2004 29 April 2004
32 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report JUDICIAL ORGANISATIONAL CHART
Chief Justice Warren, J
President Court of Appeal Winneke, JA
Ormiston, Charles, Callaway, Batt, Buchanan, Chemov, Vincent, Eames, Nettle JA JA JA JA JA JA JA JA JA
Byrne, J Ashley, J Teague, J (Commercial and (Common Law Division) (Criminal Division) Equity Dvision)
Cummins, J Harper, J Smith, J
Coldrey, J Hansen, J Gillard, J
Kellam, J Mandie, J Kellam, J
Redlich, J Habersberger, Bongiorno, J J
Dodds- Streeton, Osborn, J J
Whelan, J Nettle, J
Williams, J
Balmford, J
Morris, J
Kaye, J
Hollingworth, Senior Master J Master Mahony Cain
Master Master Master Master Master Dowling, Kings Wheeler Evans Bruce QC
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 33 JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION
JUDICIAL EMPLOYEES 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 As at 30 June 2004, the number of judicial employees totalled 72. This regular use of these systems in the criminal courts and some civil courts has meant total comprised 46 associates, 26 tipstaves and one information officer, described that Tipstaves undergo specific training. The fact that these new systems are only as follows: located in some courts means they are not used regularly by all Tipstaves. Associates Consequently, training constitutes an ongoing requirement. Associates are Officers of the Court assigned to assist Judges and Masters. As at Courts’ Information Officer 30 June 2004, there were a total of 32 Judges’ Associates and six Masters’ Associates. Created in 1993, the position of Courts’ Information Officer supports the flow Many Associates are legally qualified or hold qualifications in other disciplines. The of public information to the media from the precinct of the courts (Supreme Court, duties of Judges’ Associates will differ in some respects to those performed by County Court, Magistrates’ Court and Children’s Court). Ms Prue Innes, an experi- Masters’ Associates because of the differences in the work performed by Judges and enced journalist, has held the position since its inception. Masters. However there are certain duties that all Associates may be called upon to The Courts’ Information Officer monitors press and media interest in the perform, depending on the jurisdiction in which their Judge or Master sits and the business of the Court, while applying sensitivity to the administration of justice and type of case to be heard. the protocols of the various courts. In this capacity, Ms Innes routinely deals with Associates prepare and maintain paperwork, schedule and coordinate inter- members of the media and judiciary in ensuring that the information interests of locutory hearings and, in the case of Judges’ Associates, liaise with the Listing the media do not conflict with the judicial process. This approach has resulted Master regarding trial dates, sit in court with the Judge or Master, and liaise with in an improved flow of information to the press with respect to matters such as other sections of the Court, the profession and the public. Masters’ Associates suppression orders and Judges’ sentencing remarks. perform some of the duties undertaken by Tipstaves, while Judges’ Associates In addition, the Courts’ Information Officer contributes to improving the sometimes perform such duties in the absence of the Tipstaff. Associates work education of the media with respect to the courts by conducting periodic seminars closely with the Judge or Master as personal assistant and researcher. The Associate for journalists on the: must be appropriately accessible to practitioners and the public, while maintaining • pitfalls of court reporting; the Judge’s confidentiality. The work performed by the Judges and Masters of the • contempt of court issues; Court is often highly technical and complex, involving huge numbers of docu- • special considerations to be applied to jury trials; and ments and months of pre-trial management, both in specialist lists and generally. • various statutory limitations on reporting. Associates exercise commensurate skills in document management and adminis- Attendees include cadet journalists from the major media organisations, tration and are expected to be computer literate. journalism students from RMIT, and reporters in the suburban and regional The Associate to the Judge sitting in the Practice Court is required to be on media. During the reporting period these seminars took place in Melbourne and call 24 hours a day. Judges’ Associates must also attend Judges on circuit, arraign regional cities. prisoners, empanel juries and take their verdicts. They are required to accept and As a result, there has been a considerable improvement in the flow of infor- maintain the proper custody of all exhibits tendered during the course of the trial. mation and understanding between the courts and the media, which has operated In addition, they preside at hearings where evidence is given by deposition. Judges’ to minimise the risk of disruption to the judicial process by the inadvertent publica- Associates perform complex legal research, assist the Judge by discussing legal tion of prejudicial material. arguments and summarising evidence and authorities, and help with drafting and proofreading judgments. Duties performed by individual Associates will vary. Tipstaves The role of Tipstaff involves a wide range of tasks, reflecting the changing requirements of the courts and their Judges. Primarily, the Tipstaff acts as a personal and confidential attendant to the assigned Judge, carrying out 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 Judge’s library and attend to a range of other needs.
34 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT In addition, Judges gave presentations on the following subjects: • Coroner’s Conference presented by former Chief Justice John Phillips on During the reporting period, many Judges attended a number of conferences, 21–24 May 2003 including the annual conferences of Supreme Court Judges and Federal Court • Children as Witnesses, given by the Acting Chief Justice Mr Justice John Judges in January 2003 in Adelaide, and in Auckland in 2004. A number of Judges Winneke on 14 November 2003, open to all courts presented papers or chaired sessions at the Commonwealth Law Conference in • VCAT Orientation presented by Justice Morris on 18 March 2004 Melbourne in April 2003. • Sexual Offences Workshop given by members of the Court’s Steering Judges also attended, or presented papers and sessions, at a number of confer- Committee to members of the County Court ences organised by the Australian Institute of Judicial Administration, including: • Magistrates’ Intensive presented by the Chief Justice and Justice Morris • a lecture by The Honourable Claire D’Heureux-Dube on The Supreme on 2–4 June 2004 Court of Canada in the Era of Globalisation; • 6th and 7th AIJA Tribunals Conferences; LIBRARY • 6th AIJA Masters’ Conference; The Supreme Court Library provides information and reference services to • AIJA’s annual conference New challenges, Fresh Solutions; the judiciary, Court staff and the legal profession. The Library provides an online • 13th AIJA Oration in Judicial Administration, delivered by the Chief catalogue and database system available to users via the Internet. Justice of Australia, the Honourable Murray Gleeson, in the Supreme In 2001 the Library began a project to scan all paper-based judgments into Court’s Banco Court to mark the centenary of the High Court; electronic format. As at 30 June 2004, all judgments up to the 1980s have been • National Judicial Orientation Programme, run with the New South scanned. The judgments will be linked to index records on the database and will be Wales Judicial Commission and the National Judicial College of available electronically via the Court’s intranet/website. The Library is grateful to Australia; the Council of Law Reporting for funding the scanning project and to the Victoria • 2nd AIJA Appellate Judges’ Seminar; and Law Foundation for initial funding to make the database publicly available. • a discourse by Chief Justice Marilyn Warren on The Growth in Financially, the Library continued to operate under extreme pressure. As a Tribunal Power. result, the Library had to reduce its permanent staff from eight to seven. The Judicial College of Victoria provided a variety of educational programs, Subscription costs have risen alarmingly, and the Library is facing a serious short- including the following subjects: fall. Despite numerous requests for a review of the fixed amount, admission fees, a • a range of moot trials large source of income, have not risen since January 1997. In 2003–04, local • DNA Profiling admissions income totalled $442,960, admissions under the Mutual Recognition • Law Reports and Transcripts Act 1992 totalled $142,800 and Court Fees totalled $176,979. • Court Specialisation – Family Violence • Common Law Negligence • The Place for Alternative Dispute Resolution and JDR in the Courts – Whose Court is it Anyway? • Vietnamese Cultural Awareness • Youth and Mental Illness • Visits to Correctional and Forensic Facilities
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 35 COURT MANAGEMENT
SENIOR MANAGERS Registrar of Probates The senior managers and non-judicial staff of the Court are public servants Mr Michael Halpin, B Juris, LLB, carries out the role of Registrar of Probates. appointed and managed under the authority of the Public Sector Management Mr Halpin was admitted to practise at the Supreme Court in 1976 and the High Court and Employment Act 1988 (Vic). The Chief Executive Officer chairs the Senior in 1980. Previously, he was a practising solicitor, solicitor at State Trustees and Managers Meeting, which meets frequently on matters of administration and plan- Manager of the Legal Branch at the Land Titles Office. In 1989 Mr Halpin completed ning. As at 30 June 2004, the Court’s senior managers and their principal responsi- the inaugural Australia–New Zealand Executive Interchange Program with the bilities were as follows: Graduate School of Management (Monash). In 1993 he was appointed Registrar and is a member of the Probate Users' Committee of the Court. As Registrar, Mr Halpin Chief Executive Officer oversees the processing of all common form grants of representation of deceased In April 2004 Mr Fin McRae, BA, LLB (Hons), was appointed as Chief estates in Victoria, and ensures the secure custody of all testamentary records and Executive Officer of the Court. Mr McRae has extensive experience in the State and wills deposited with him for safekeeping. In addition, he assists applicants who wish Federal Court systems. to obtain probate or administration in small estate matters. The Chief Executive Officer of the Court reports to the Chief Justice and the President of the Court of Appeal for the day-to-day administration of the Court. The Court of Appeal Registry Manager portfolios falling directly under the supervision of the Chief Executive Officer are: Mr Rob Schade manages the Court of Appeal Registry under the general • strategic and business planning; direction of Master Philip Cain, Registrar of the Court of Appeal. • human resource management; Office Manager – Funds in Court • financial management; Mr Steven Wharton is the Office Manager of the Funds in Court Office. The • information technology; and Funds in Court function is the direct responsibility of the Senior Master and its • management of works and services. operation is covered elsewhere in this Annual Report. The Office Manager oversees Corporate Services Manager the day-to-day administration of the Office. Mr Jim Paterson, MBA, BA, CPA serves as Corporate Services Manager of the Juries Commissioner Court. He reports to the Chief Executive Officer, directs the finance operations of the Mr Rudy Monteleone is the Juries Commissioner. He manages the staff of the Court and exercises general supervision of the Human Resources Manager, office of the Juries Commissioner and exercises all of the legal and quasi-judicial Building and Services Manager and Information Technology Manager. functions assigned by the Juries Act 2000. The Juries Commissioner provides a jury Prothonotary/Principal Registrar service to meet the needs of the Supreme and County Courts throughout Victoria. Mr Joseph Saltalamacchia is the Prothonotary/Principal Registrar of the Court. In April 1974 Mr Saltalamacchia began his career with the Court as a filing FAREWELL TO BRUCE MCLEAN clerk at the age of 19. Since then, he has devoted 30 years of service to the Court, In July 2003, Bruce McLean retired working in a variety of roles within the Registry. The Court appointed from his role as Chief Executive Officer of Mr Saltalamacchia as Acting Prothonotary/Principal Registrar on 1 August 1994 the Court after an exemplary career span- and appointed him on a full-time basis 23 November 1995. As Prothonotary/ ning nearly 35 years. Principal Registrar, Mr Saltalamacchia manages the registry and all aspects of Many of his accomplishments includ- proceedings and appeals within the jurisdiction of the Court. He has statutory and ed: in 1978 being the youngest person quasi-judicial obligations and responsibilities for: appointed a Deputy Prothonotary in • making consent orders; Victoria’s history; in 1984 playing an instru- mental role in establishing the Commercial • collecting, collating and preparing statistics and reports on behalf of List and the Court’s computer case management system, CO-CASSIS, which was the Court; the first of its kind in Australia and widely regarded as having set the pattern for • secure custody and safekeeping of Court records; other courts nationally and overseas – it is still in operation today. • collecting and accounting for all fees received by the Court; Everyone at the Court thanked him for his significant contributions and • dealing with applications to waive court fees and subpoenas; and wished him well in his retirement. • conducting pre-trial conferences and mediations.
36 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report SERVICE DELIVERY
PRINCIPAL REGISTRY Major Activities and Initiatives During the reporting period, the Prothonotary's Office achieved the following The Principal Registry of the Court at Melbourne comprises the Prothonotary’s major activities and initiatives: Office and the Office of the Registrar of Probates. The Principal Registry provides • On 6 December 2003 the annual meeting of Supreme Court Regional services to the judiciary, legal profession and members of the public. Ten circuit Deputy Prothonotaries was held at the Principal Registry in Melbourne. courts provide registry services at Ballarat, Bendigo, Geelong, Hamilton, Horsham, At that meeting, The Honourable Justice Bongiorno addressed the group Mildura, Sale, Shepparton, Wangaratta and Warrnambool. The registries at these and the newly appointed Chief Justice attended. courts are multi-jurisdictional and include the Magistrates’ Court, County Court • In August 2003 the Senior Deputy Prothonotary visited each of the and the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Regional court registries to discuss with regional staff and local practi- Prothonotary’s Office tioners the practices and procedures of the Court. As the central depository for all Court files, with the exception of files for the • In the absence of an integrated computer-based case management Court of Appeal, the Prothonotary’s Office is headed by the Prothonotary/Principal system, the Prothonotary’s Office consolidated some previously separate Registrar, and efficiently processes a massive amount of documentation generated applications, resulting in improved efficiencies involving data collec- by Court users. tion and reporting. This process of consolidating applications will Staff of the Prothonotary’s Office are responsible for: continue in the next reporting period. • issuing writs, originating motions and summonses; • The Secretary of the Department of Justice awarded Registry staff • collating statistics; Partnership Awards for their contributions to improving the efficiency • providing advice and support to judicial officers and the Chief Executive and service delivery of the Registry (refer to page 9). Officer in all administrative aspects of the Court’s civil jurisdiction; • Registry staff were actively involved in a number of activities and • assisting all Court users, including unrepresented litigants; and committees, such as delivering lectures to practitioners and their staff, • managing non-party pre-trial discovery under subpoenas pursuant to and students of various educational institutions. Rule 42.10 (Subpoena for Production to Prothonotary). • The Prothonotary and Registrar of Probates held information sessions The procedure provided by Rule 42.10 – Subpoena for Production to for the Victorian Bar Readers Course and staff of the Registry have con- Prothonotary – has continued to be popular with the profession. The use of the pro- tinued to be invited to provide presentations to a range of audiences at cedure substantially increased during the reporting period, with a resulting increase the Leo Cussens Institute. in the workload associated with the administration of this process. • The Prothonotary’s Office began an analysis of its technical and proce- dural guides and developed registry-based training modules for staff. How We Process Documentation The Prothonotary enthusiastically supports the program and the wide- During the reporting period, staff continued to file documents manually, spread recognition of the value of continuous training and having which they received by courier, mail or personal delivery. Except on rare occasions, reliable and user-friendly technical guides and manuals. documents cannot be filed by facsimile. Registry staff date and time stamp documents, then process and place them Practice Court on file. In most cases and wherever possible, staff immediately process documents As one of the major interfaces between Judges' Associates and the Registry, requiring specific action, such as originating processes, applications, judgments the Practice Court provides access to the Court for the public, handling urgent and warrants. applications 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. During the period, staff of the Prothonotary's Office processed a high volume Previously, the Honourable Mr Justice Beach presided over the Practice Court of documents, including Subpoenas for Production to Prothonotary, processed as with well-established protocols in place. Since His Honour’s retirement, Judges have follows: rotated through the Practice Court on a fortnightly basis. This change has high- • 1,432 Subpoenas filed; lighted the need for effective communication and the establishment of effective list- • 110 Objections received; ing protocols. During the next financial year, we will consider these changes and • 74 Objections dealt with by the Court; new protocols to achieve further improvements and a more streamlined process. • 634 Inspections held; and Pre-Trial Conferences and Hearings • 48 Applications to remove documents from the Prothonotary’s custody, An important role of the Prothonotary’s Office involves holding pre-trial of which 35 were granted and 13 refused. conferences, giving parties an opportunity to resolve matters and settle disputes prior to hearing and avoid a costly litigation process.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 37 SERVICE DELIVERY
In a limited number of cases, the parties may request an order from the Court Other categories of grant comprised: to attend a pre-trial conference to work out the issues. The conference assists parties • 1,542 Administration upon Intestacy; either to settle the matter or narrow down the contentious issues with the aim of • 451 Administration with the will annexed; reducing time in court, and improving Court performance and responsiveness. • 223 Reseals of foreign grants; and Often, pre-trial hearings resolve the matter, avoiding the need for a full hearing. • 217 other miscellaneous grants, including limited grants. Customer Service The number of applications for grants filed by source included: The Prothonotary’s Office continued to provide a high standard of customer • 20,580 by practitioners; service, issuing and processing the vast majority of documentation upon its receipt • 1,096 by State Trustees; in the Registry. To monitor performance levels, the Court’s Principal Registry • six by other Trustee Companies; and periodically conducts customer surveys. In the last survey, customers were invited • 1,322 by unrepresented litigants. to rate the service of the Prothonotary’s Office in key aspects of registry services, The Office continued to dispatch Grants of Probate and Administration in five namely; counter service, telephone assistance and the registry environment. In working days for all applications filed in proper form. This result has been main- percentage terms, the results were as follows: tained for a number of years and compares favourably with interstate jurisdictions, • Counter – Excellent 29%; Very Good 51%; and Good 20%. especially in view of the volume of applications filed and the available resources. • Telephone – Excellent 15%; Very Good 67%; and Good 18%. • Environment – Excellent 18%; Very Good 39%; Good 39 per cent and Probate Users Committee Fair 4%. The Registrar and Deputy Registrar attended seven meetings of the Probate Results for the Office of the Registrar of Probates were similarly strong. Users Committee during 2003–04. Chaired by Justice Harper, the committee main- Court users requiring a greater level of procedural assistance than counter tains appropriate lines of communication between the legal profession and those staff can provide are referred to senior Registry officers. Staff make every effort to who regularly deal with the Probate Office. In addition, the committee serves as a ensure that proper procedures are followed while ensuring access to justice. platform for discussing proposals to reform probate law and practice. Probate Office Small Estate Matters The Probate Office deals with all applications for common form grants of The Probate Office assists Court users with matters relating to Small Estates. probate and administration. The operation of the Probate Office requires specific Among the most sensitive of the services provided by the Court, the Registrar deter- technical knowledge. In recognising the importance of retaining, acknowledging mines eligibility for assistance by the relationship of an applicant to the deceased and rewarding such expertise, we aim to build on our strengths so as to deliver and monetary threshold limits prescribed by statute. During the reporting period faster, more focused and more consistent services, responsive to the changing needs of practitioners and other Probate users. the Registrar prepared and granted 43 regional and 51 Melbourne applications. As head of the Office, the Registrar of Probates is invested with jurisdiction Unrepresented Litigants in all non-contentious probate matters. The Office comprises nine staff with At the Probate Office, we are conscious of the need to assist, in a practical specialised expertise in probate law and practice. Committed to values of service, sense, the growing numbers of unrepresented litigants. To this end we reproduced expedition and respect for the individual, staff continually advise and guide practi- useful information about Office contact details and Probate forms on the Court's tioners and others in processing their applications. website. Over the last 10 years, applications by unrepresented litigants have steadily As its core functions, the Probate Office: increased, from 3.8 per cent in 1993–94 to 5.8 per cent during the reporting peri- • grants representation of deceased estates in Victoria (16,000 annually); od, representing 1,322 applications filed. We anticipate the upward trend to contin- • provides a Small Estates service to members of the public; and ue. • acts as custodian for all testamentary documents, including Deposited Wills. Although we streamlined our administrative processes and established plans to manage unrepresented litigants, their impact on the operation of the Office Probate Proceedings remained, nevertheless, significant. During the reporting period staff spent more In recent years Probate proceedings have grown in numbers and complexity. time explaining Probate processes to unrepresented litigants and assisting them Particularly evident during the 18-month period 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2004 with procedural advice, placing considerable pressure on staff to meet their expecta- were proceedings involving ‘informal wills’ (totalling 58 applications) and applica- tions. Such proceedings took more time to process, since many were incomplete tions by ‘domestic partners’ in intestate estates (totalling 45 applications). and applicants were unfamiliar with the rules of evidence. The increasing workload During the reporting period, the Registrar made 23,116 orders granting placed heavy demands on staff who were constantly required to maintain a balance representation. Proceedings were filed at an average of 1,284 monthly. The most between expedition and providing an efficient and accurate service. The anticipated common form of grant was Probate, totalling 20,683 orders. ICMS Project, as described on page 39, will help to alleviate much of this pressure.
38 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Initiatives Launched FACILITIES MANAGEMENT During the reporting period we launched two major initiatives. The Supreme Court precinct comprises 28 courtrooms, chambers and admin- We launched the Probate component of the Court's website, improving cus- istrative offices located in four buildings adjacent or close to the original heritage tomer service and, more importantly, providing a more accessible source of infor- Court building situated on the corner of William Street and Lonsdale Street. The mation, forms and services, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This initiative has locations and age of those buildings are as follows: increased the methods available to individuals in communicating with the Office, Location Year Opened through e-mail and Internet services. Supreme Court Building and Library 210 William Street 1884 We began preliminary work to create online Probate advertisements, replac- Court of Appeal 459 Lonsdale Street 1893 ing newspapers as the current medium of advertising used by probate practitioners Old High Court 450 Little Bourke Street 1926 and others. Advertisements will be posted on a dedicated portion of the Court's web- Registries and Masters’ Courts 436 Lonsdale Street 1980s* site. The initiative will improve the visibility of, and provide a single comprehensive access point for, all advertisements, enabling universal access for interested parties. *Major refurbishment. The age of the buildings, their current condition and the tempo of public Probate Rules Amended activity requires a constant program of maintenance and repairs to enable the At the instigation of the Registrar, the Rules Committee amended the Probate Court to deliver justice to Victorians. Public areas and many courtrooms lack Rules relative to the requirements for Surety Guarantees and Death Certificates. appropriate air conditioning, fire detection and emergency evacuation warning The new measures ensured that the requirements of granting Probate operated as systems, and access for persons with mobility constraints. efficiently and equitably as possible. The measures further enhanced the efficiency Engineering studies have conservatively estimated the required maintenance of the Office by enabling improved workflow processes, with staff focusing on the expenditure for the three historic buildings at some $1.7 million per year. core competencies of examining and issuing grants of Probate and Administration. Works and maintenance activities completed over the last two years are ICMS Project Anticipated summarised in the table below. The works and maintenance expenditure incurred Since 1985 the Probate Office has relied on the mainframe computer system fell considerably short of the expenditure identified in the studies and this state of SCORPION to record grants of Probate and Administration.The staff of the Probate affairs is clearly not sustainable. Office have long recognised the need for an up-to-date, integrated computer system to support the Probate jurisdiction. We anticipate the Justice Department-sponsored Facilities Management Expenditure Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS) project will permit a range of 2003–04 2002–03 administrative functions to be automated. The proposed system, featuring an $$ online search facility, automated document production, state-of-the-art statistical Maintenance and Minor Works reporting with the capacity for filing online applications, will guarantee the delivery Urgent and Essential 33,100 17,300 Programmed Maintenance 42,100 38,200 of improved service and efficiency levels. Minor Works 240,300 313,600 Providing Future Services Old High Court Works 143,400 137,200 The potential for providing future services over the Internet is significant. We Security Equipment and Maintenance 23,900 72,400 Subtotal 482,800 578,700 could digitalise Probate indices and make them available on the Internet to be used Major Works by staff, practitioners and others to search for and order copies of wills and grants. Fire Prevention Sprinkler System 211,900 459,500 Providing terminals in libraries and other public places could enable ready access Dungeon Restoration (Grant from Heritage Commission) - 30,450 to online Probate services. Web forms could allow electronic filing of applications Subtotal 211,900 489,950 that could be automatically converted into cases for processing. As foreshadowed in Total Facilities Management Expenditure 694,700 1,068,650 the previous Annual Report, the ability to move to such a system is dependant on the readiness of practitioners to conduct business electronically and providing The Court has identified and prioritised a range of urgent and longer term related electronic documentation that must currently be provided on paper, such as works and maintenance programs in the Supreme Court Strategic Facilities death certificates and wills. We will need to address primary considerations such as Development Plan 2004–2009 for incorporation into the Courts Strategic Facilities issues of security and authenticity. Services of this magnitude would require Development Plan and the Department of Justice Multi-Year Strategy for Capital changes in legislation and a significant culture change in terms of service use. Works. In June 2004 the total cost of those works was estimated at $5 million. The Court will continue to promote the urgent need for those works.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 39 THE VICTORIAN JURY SYSTEM
The Victorian jury system and its administration operates under the Juries Act • The Juries Commissioner responds to the requirements of the Chief 2000. The Juries Act provides for the operation and administration of a system of Justice and Chief Judge for the jury system and maintains effective trial by jury that meets the following aims: communication with the Supreme and County Courts as to their • Equitably spread the obligation of jury service throughout the requirements for juries in Melbourne and regional courts. community. • Make juries more representative of the community. STAFFING AND BUDGET • Permit the timely adoption of new technologies for the selection of With regard to the staffing and budget requirements of the JCO, the Juries persons for jury service. Commissioner performs the following tasks: • Manages the administrative and financial operations of the JCO, THE OFFICE OF THE JURIES including reviewing, developing and implementing policies and proce- COMMISSIONER dures for administering and managing the Victorian Jury System. The Office of the Juries Commissioner (JCO) is a traditional appointment of • Directly manages 12 employees in Melbourne and obtains support from the Court. Formerly performed by a Deputy Sheriff under the Supreme Court Act Deputy Juries Commissioners and Jury Keepers at 13 regional courts. 1986, the role was reconstituted under the Juries Act, which came into operation on • Administers an annual budget of approximately $3.5 million. 1 August 2001. • Provides training and development support and services to staff Principally, the new office would continue to perform all tasks previously involved with the administration of the jury system. performed by the Deputy Sheriff, but more importantly the creation of the new office would achieve the following objectives: JURIES STATISTICS • Establish a structure enabling improvements to jury management and For the purpose of this transitional 18-month Annual Report, jury statistics administration in the Supreme and County Courts. are presented covering two periods, 1 January 2003 to 30 June 2003 and 1 July 2003 • Provide a consistent and uniform approach to jury management and to 30 June 2004, as follows: administration across the State. • For the six months to 30 June 2003, jurors summoned totalled 21,324, • Improve services for jurors in Melbourne and Regional locations. with jurors empanelled in Supreme and County Court trials. Located at the new County Court complex at 250 William Street Melbourne, • During 2003–04, jurors summoned totalled 40,150, with 7,187 jurors the JCO provides jurors for both the Supreme and County Courts. Deputy Juries empanelled in 651 Supreme and County Court trials. Commissioners at regional courts summon prospective jurors for sittings at their • Jurors served a total of 12,486 jury trial days for the six months to respective courts. 30 June 2003, completing 3,595 jury trial days in Supreme Court trials. • During 2003–04, jurors served a total of 21,351 jury trial days, complet- AUTHORITY AND REPORTING ing 5,928 jury trial days in Supreme Court trials. The Juries Commissioner operates under the following areas of authority and reporting: Juries Statistics • Under the provisions of Part 3 of the Public Administration Act 2004 Six months to (formerly the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 2003–04 30 June 2003 1998) the Juries Commissioner reports to the Chief Executive Officer of Jurors Summoned the Court. Melbourne 27,921 14,126 Circuits 12,229 7,198 • The Juries Commissioner exercises all of the legal and quasi-judicial Total 40,150 21,324 duties and functions assigned by the Juries Act. Jurors Empanelled • Under the authority of the Juries Act, the Juries Commissioner provides Melbourne 5,543 1,796 a jury service to the Supreme and the County Courts. Circuits 1,644 624 Total 7,187 2,420 Supreme and County Court Trials Melbourne 496 165 Circuits 155 59 Total 651 224 Supreme Court Jury Trial Days 5,928 3,595
40 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report GUIDING PRINCIPLES OF JURY MANAGEMENT The JCO has developed and adopted guiding principles for jury management that have a dual focus: • First and foremost, to provide the courts with jurors who are eligible, available and informed of the duties and obligations of a juror. • Secondly, to achieve this aim efficiently and effectively by minimising the level of disruption to prospective jurors and their employers. With this dual focus in mind, we developed the following principles: • Whenever necessary, provide support services for jurors, such as avail- ability and access to counselling and debriefing sessions. • Defer jury service to a time that is mutually convenient, and thereby minimise disruption to the lives and operations of prospective jurors and employers, while ensuring the courts run efficiently. Jurors orientation area. • Wherever possible, avoid calling jury panels prematurely or unnecessarily. • Minimise the inconvenience caused to prospective jurors by streamlin- ing the process through which jurors satisfy a jury summons. • Excuse or discharge prospective jurors as efficiently and as courteously as possible. • Make every effort to keep the jury experience as rewarding as possible.
MAJOR ACHIEVEMENTS During the reporting period, we implemented the following initiatives: • We developed and implemented statewide the Jury Information Management System (JIMS) to improve the administrative processes associated with jury management. Improvements included streamlin- ing the database of prospective jurors by developing an electronic process, replacing the previously labour-intensive manual process. We
expect to further improve our performance over the coming financial Jurors lounge area. year, as we plan to further develop the system to incorporate a ‘real time’ finance and attendance module enabling greater financial accountability and tracking of persons attending for jury service. • In 2003, we completed a review of the juror telephone message service and online information system. Since then, we have implemented a statewide 1800 free call message service for prospective jurors sum- moned to attend their respective Law Courts. • To provide additional access to information for both summoned jurors and the general public, we developed an online message and general information service, which will be fully operational by late 2004. • As part of the JCO’s Community Education Program, we held forums at 10 secondary schools.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 41 THE COURT’S PEOPLE
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT The new Victorian Public Service (VPS) Career Structure was implemented In identifying individual and unit needs, we have undertaken training and across all areas of the Department of Justice including the Court. The new structure development during the reporting period and staff attended a range of training is designed to: courses that included: • foster career development and job growth; • Computer Skills to complement unit needs; • provide greater accountability and consistency; and • Managing Potentially Violent Clients; and • achieve a professional, responsive and flexible Public Service. • Train the Trainer and Management for Supervisors. The new VPS Structure comprises six grade classifications (plus a seventh The area of training and development continued to be an important criterion Senior Technical Specialist grade) where the grades do not overlap with a hierarchy for the Court and will continue to grow significantly in the future. of jobs. The grades include value ranges, and career progression through these value ranges is based on meeting specific progression criteria. The criteria include NEW HUMAN RESOURCES learning, professionalism and performance. MANAGER In April 2004 the implementation of a new Performance Management and Following the departure of Jenny Fletcher on maternity leave, the Court Progression Plans (PMPP) system took place. The PMPP is developed through a engaged the services of a new a Human Resources Manager, Robyn Miller. Robyn consultative process between the staff member and his or her supervisor/manager. comes to the Court with a strong background in human resource management, This new system has been progressed through a number of short stages; April 2004 training and development and operational management, with seven years’ experi- to September 2004, October 2004 to June 2005 and finally July 2005 to June 2006 ence in the private sector and more than six years’ experience in the public sector. when it will be implemented yearly. Robyn is committed to the overall growth in training and development and believes These new plans are meant to clearly outline the work to be completed over a it to be the key to a strong work force. performance cycle, provide tangible guidance to staff on conduct and values, and facilitate a comprehensive learning and development strategy that supports current Judiciary and Staff Profile (Full-Time Staff Equivalent) and future job and career needs. 2003–04 A new Enterprise Bargaining Agreement 2001 was struck under the Public Judicial Officers Sector Management and Employment Act 1998 (Vic). This agreement was instru- Chief Justice 1 mental in establishing salary increases of 3 per cent effective from 1 July 2001 and President 1 Appeal Judges 9 3 per cent effective from 1 July 2002. Trial Judges 21 Masters 7 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Total 38 Judicial Staff Support The Court is an equal employment opportunity employer. We are committed Associates and Researchers 46 to selecting the best applicants based on merit and equity principles. During Tipstaves 26 Direct Support Staff 17.3 2003–04, we updated staff on current issues and developments with regard to Total 89.3 harassment and discrimination issues within the workplace by conducting semi- Funds in Court Office 9.4 nars, workshops and circulating relevant literature. Court Administration 73.2 Board of Examiners 3.4 OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH AND Juries Division 12.6 SAFETY Total Supreme Court 225.9 We aim to provide and maintain a safe working environment that ensures the health and wellbeing of Court employees, Judges and visitors to the Court. During 2003–04, we reviewed and tested emergency and evacuation procedures and build- ing security on a regular basis. The Court has its own Occupational Health and Safety committee comprising a broad section of its employee base plus representa- tives from management. This committee has been instrumental in bringing to the notice of Management various issues that could affect the wellbeing of staff and workings of the Court.
42 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report COMMUNITY ACCESS
The Court has many links with the community it serves through volunteer • practitioners for approval as a person under whom articles may be organisations, statutory bodies involved in supervising prisoners on parole, forensic served; and leave and legal education and judicial organisations such as the Australian Institute • law-teaching institutions for approval of particular subjects, the passing of Judicial Administration and Judicial Conference of Australia. In doing so, the Court of which will satisfy, in part, the Council’s requirement that, before lends the expertise and extensive experience of its Judges to community programs admission, candidates demonstrate an understanding of, and compe- with the aim of benefiting the Court and the community. tence in, each of 11 prescribed ‘heads of knowledge’. In addition, the Council considers applications by tertiary teaching institu- COURT NETWORK tions for approval of courses of study as satisfying the tertiary qualification require- Although not formally a unit of the Court, the volunteer organisation Court ments for admission in Victoria. Network performs valuable support service to members of the public who attend the The Council’s responsibilities are discharged at no cost to the State. The Court. The organisation has services in the Supreme Court and other State Courts extensive secretarial services required by the Council continued to be supplied by and Federal Courts. the firm of Allens Arthur Robinson without charge. Other expenses of the Council Court Network provides support, information and referrals to Court users in are either borne by the Court or paid out-of-pocket by individual members of the proceedings before the Court. Members of Court Network do not give legal advice Council. but assist people to understand the process and procedures in which they are The membership of the Council is prescribed in section 331 of the Legal involved. Additional support and information is provided through Court Network’s Practice Act 1996. The Chief Justice is its President and other judicial members telephone information and referral service prior to or after a court appearance. from the Court included the President of the Court of Appeal and Justices Ormiston, Funding from the State and Commonwealth Governments, and Court Charles, Teague, Cummins, Coldrey, Harper and Williams. Network’s own fund-raising activities, maintain the statewide service, providing more than 66,000 contacts annually. ADULT PAROLE BOARD In the Court in Melbourne, Court Network has three programs. The first The Adult Parole Board is an independent statutory body established under the program offers the generic service of support, information and referral to people Corrections Act 1986 and is chaired by Justice Kellam, with Justice Teague as Deputy attending a trial, an appeal or for any other court process. Other agencies, Court Chairperson. The board regularly sits, exercising its jurisdiction over the release of personnel, police and counsel frequently refer people to Court Network for this prisoners on parole. Its judicial members visit prisons throughout Victoria in the support. Court Network operates under an ‘outreach’ model and approaches people course of their duties. The Board provides a framework that enables prisoners to to offer assistance. During the reporting period, the number of people assisted undertake a step-by-step re-entry into the community. totalled 7,500. The board’s objectives are to: The second program provides volunteers at the information desk each • fulfil its statutory obligations efficiently and effectively and in the best morning for two to three hours. This program assists, on average, 50 to 60 people interests of the community; each morning to locate the right court, building, personnel, library, jury pool or • make independent and appropriate decisions regarding the release of other similar requests. The enquiries are many and varied and often volunteers take prisoners on supervised conditional release; the person seeking the information to the appropriate place rather than merely • make appropriate orders relating to cancelling parole and returning directing the person. offenders to prison custody; and The third program, which has been in existence for more than 12 years, is the • ensure that offenders are properly prepared to reintegrate into the com- education program primarily for VCE legal studies students. During the reporting munity. period, the number of students and other interested people who participated in the program totalled 11,500. Managed and staffed by Court Network, the program oper- FORENSIC LEAVE PANEL ates in conjunction with the education liaison officer at the Law Institute of Victoria. The Forensic Leave Panel was established under the Crimes (Mental Impairment and Unfitness to be Tried) Act 1997. The Act came into effect on COUNCIL OF LEGAL EDUCATION 18 April 1998 and governs the detention, management and release of persons found First established by the Legal Practitioners Reciprocity Act 1903 and then unfit to be tried or not guilty on the grounds of mental impairment. re-established under the Legal Practice Act 1996, the Council of Legal Education is The Forensic Leave Panel must include a Judge or Judges of the Court, nomi- a statutory body charged with determining the qualifications required for admis- nated by the Chief Justice. During the reporting period, Justice Teague was President sion to legal practice. It may make rules for, or with respect to, courses of study, and Justice Coldrey was a judicial member of the panel. examinations and service of articles. Such rules have been made from time to time. One of the main functions of the panel is to hear applications for leave of Those presently in force are the Legal Practice (Admission) Rules 1999. absence, and appeals with respect to special leave of absence applications, by The Council meets at least four times each year and more often, if required. forensic patients and forensic residents who are subject to supervision orders, and Members individually consider matters regarding applications by: by Federal forensic patients. • overseas candidates for admission;
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 43 COMMUNITY ACCESS
JUDICIAL ORGANISATIONS • Justice John Coldrey co-chairs the Forensic Leave Panel, and was on the Council of Legal Education in the reporting period. He was a significant The Australian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA) is the leading participant in round table meetings regarding the Victoria Law Reform organisation in Australia for researching and improving the courts and judicial Commission’s reference on defences to homicide. systems. Its members totals approximately 1,000 and is derived from all tiers of Justice Coldrey was a presenter at the Judicial Orientation Programs of courts in Australia. the AIJA, Judicial Commission of New South Wales and National Judicial The Judicial Conference of Australia is a national body open to all judicial College of Australia. He has also been involved for some years in the officers dedicated to the maintenance of a strong and independent judiciary and the presentation of Advocacy Training Courses in Papua New Guinea. education of the public as to the rule of the judiciary. • Justice David Harper is the President of VACRO (the Victorian Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders); chairman of JUDGES’ ACTIVITIES the Australian Red Cross International Law Committee; a member of Most Judges are active in a variety of extra-judicial functions within the legal the board of the Margaret Cunningham Trust (at Fintona School); a community and the wider community. The following examples show their wide part-time Commissioner of the Victorian Law Reform Commission; and variety of interests, as well as their commitment to the legal profession in Australia a trustee of the Northcote Trust (which provides scholarships for the and overseas and the communities they serve: educational needs of disadvantaged groups). • The Chief Justice is the chair of the Judicial College of Victoria and • Justice Murray Kellam has been Chairperson of the Adult Parole Board president of the Victoria Law Foundation. She chairs the Victorian since March 2003. He chaired the Council of Australasian Tribunals Institute of Forensic Medicine, the Council of Legal Education and the until June 2003 and was a speaker on tribunal reform at a New Zealand Costs Coordination Committee. In addition, she is the patron of Law Commission’s symposium in Auckland in June 2003. He was the Victorian Women Lawyers. leader of the Australian Bar Association’s advocacy training team in Bangladesh in December 2003, and he conducted a two-day alternative • Justice Alex Chernov is Deputy Chancellor of the University of dispute resolution training program for Chief Justices of the South Melbourne and presides over the Hanover Moot final. He is actively Pacific in Suva in April 2004. involved in the Law Institute’s Life in the Law Program for young Justice Kellam was appointed as Chair of the National Alternative lawyers. Dispute Advisory Council (NADRAC) by the Commonwealth Attorney- • Justice Frank Vincent is chancellor of Victoria University. General on 1 January 2004. NADRAC was created in 1995 following the • Justice Geoffrey Eames chairs the Victorian Judicial Officers’ Aboriginal recommendations of the Access to Justice Advisory Committee chaired Cultural Relations Committee, is deputy chair of the Indigenous by the Honourable Justice Sackville that there should be a national Cultural Awareness Committee run by the Australian Institute of body to advise the Federal Government and Federal Courts and Judicial Administration (AIJA), and chairs the AIJA’s Jury Charge Tribunals with a view to providing a high quality, accessible, integrated Project. He has been a frequent presenter and lecturer of advocacy Federal alternative dispute resolution system. training in Victoria, Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands. • Justice Bernard Bongiorno is the president of CoAsIt, a social, welfare, • Justice Bernard Teague is the Deputy Chairperson of the Adult Parole cultural and educational organisation for Australians of Italian origin. Board and is President and co-chair of the Forensic Leave Panel. He • Justice Julie Dodds-Streeton is a member of the editorial board of the chaired the Adult Parole Board until March 2003. He is Deputy Insolvency Law Journal. Chairman of the board of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental • Justice Elizabeth Hollingworth was a senior fellow of the University of Health. Melbourne’s law school teaching advocacy, dispute resolution, and • Justice Philip Cummins retired after 20 years as lecturer in the Faculty legal research and method. She was a member of the university’s law of Law at the University of Melbourne in the subjects Legal Ethics and school faculty and a member of the national selection committee for Professional Conduct. He remains on the Faculty as the Dean’s nomi- Sir John Monash awards. nee. He lectures on professional and judicial ethics and professional • Justice Balmford is a member of the national executive of the Judicial and judicial responsibility to the Victorian Bar, the Law Institute and Conference of Australia. other bodies. He lectures on Legal Studies to secondary schools in met- COURT USER GROUPS ropolitan Melbourne and when on circuit in regional Victoria. • Justice Tim Smith was a presenter at the Judicial Orientation Programs An active system of consultation with the legal profession, Court user groups provide a vital tool to ensure best practice in conducting court cases. Barristers and of the AIJA, Judicial Commission of New South Wales and National solicitors practising in particular areas of the law meet with the Judges who conduct Judicial College of Australia. He represented the Court on the working the specialist lists, ranging from the criminal division users groups to the civil party for the significant reference on the Strategic Directions Statement litigation committee. Some Judges on circuit meet with lawyers practising in local for Victoria’s courts, which was released in September 2004 and will be areas to encourage them to take full advantage of the court sittings at regional the subject of further comment in the next Annual Report. centres throughout Victoria.
44 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report FINANCE REPORT 2002–03 AND 2003–04
INTRODUCTION ANNUAL APPROPRIATION AND In early 2004 the Court resolved to move from calendar year to financial year EXPENDITURE reporting. This Annual Report bridges the calendar year to financial year transition. The statements provide a summary of the revenues generated and budget Accordingly the report contains financial statements for the Court’s operations for allocations and expenditures in Special Appropriations and Recurrent or Annual Appropriations for the financial year ended 30 June 2003 and the financial year financial years 2002–03 and 2003–04. ended 30 June 2004. The Court is not independently financially accountable to the Parliament. The following terms and definitions are used in presenting the statements. Financial accountability of the Court is discharged through its consolidation into ‘Special Appropriations’ are funds appropriated by various Acts of the Department of Justice accounts, the review of those accounts by the Auditor- Parliament to be paid from the Consolidated Fund. In the Court Special General, and the certification of those accounts by the Department of Justice Appropriations provide for: Secretary before their tabling in the Parliament by the Attorney-General. (a) judicial salaries and related allowances and expenses; and The Court participates in this process through the Chief Executive Officer and (b) workers compensation payments for juror medical and like expenses his administrative officers’ involvement in the maintenance of financial system resulting from jury service. ‘Annual Appropriations’ are the funds provided each year consequent controls, the recording and maintenance of financial transactions on the to the passing of the Government’s budget for the ordinary purposes of providing Department’s financial records system, the preparation and submission of monthly services. As presented in these statements it comprises Recurrent Expenses and Non- reports, cooperation with internal audit and Auditor-General reviews of the Discretionary Expenses as follows: accounts and the provision of required certifications as to the completeness of those (a) Recurrent Expenses include staff salaries and related expenses and accounts. operating expenses that include all other operating costs. These financial statements are drawn from the same records that contribute (b) Non-Discretionary Expenses include those expenses that are accrued to the Departmental accounts and are intended to give a clear picture of the Court’s at Departmental level and assigned to the various business units and financial performance. the Court to reflect the full service cost of the services provided. In this The financial statements for the Court that follow both consolidate and instance they include the Capital Asset Charge or finance cost of the assets employed to deliver the Court’s services and the depreciation identify the divisional performance of the Court of Appeal and the Trial Division. expense of the assets employed. The Juries Division, which supports juries activity for both the Supreme and County ‘Revenue Retention Funds’, within the Annual Appropriation, are Courts throughout Victoria, is presented as a separate financial statement. certain funds allocated at the discretion of the Attorney-General. By agreement with Treasury, a proportion of the fees revenue collected by the Court is maintained as a revenue pool, which is allocated to the courts in accordance with priorities approved by the Attorney-General. They are identified by explanatory note to the financial statements. ‘Revenues’ reported are those fees collected by the Court on behalf of the Government and are paid into Consolidated Revenue. These fees are set by Government pursuant to the Supreme Court (Fees) (Amendment) Regulations with respect to documents and actions filed with the Court and include a variety of civil actions, including probate of deceased estates. The range and level of current fees are maintained on the Court’s website at www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au as a service to the public.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report 45 SUPREME COURT OPERATING STATEMENT For the year ended 30 June 2003
General Comments The financial position of the Court reported in the Operating Statement Within the Recurrent allocation to the Court is an amount of $1,307,000 identifies a total budgetary appropriation of $25.718 million and expenditure of allocated for specific purposes related to Court Security ($250,000), Judicial $26.245 million. Conferences ($100,000), Support Staff for Judges ($300,000), Litigation Support The revenue performance of the Court is very satisfactory. The full year Staff ($140,000), Court Maintenance ($150,000) and Business Improvement revenues of $10.135 million exceeded budget expectations by some $1.135 million. Initiatives ($367,000). Administrative Review. These amounts are not separately This result reflects progressive increases in Court and Probate Fees, set by the identified in the Operating Statement. Government, and ongoing growth in applications for letters of administration.
Surplus/ Budget Actual (Deficit) $'000 $'000 $'000
REVENUE Court Fees, probate, all sources 9,000 10,135 1,135
EXPENDITURE
Court of Appeal Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances and related expenses 3,152 3,108 44
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 1,601 1,554 47 Operating Costs 189 525 (336) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 769 777 (8) Total Court of Appeal 5,711 5,964 (253)
Trial Division Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances and related expenses 7,118 6,781 337
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 4,802 5,614 (812) Operating Costs 3,363 4,106 (743) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 4,725 3,780 945 Total Trial Division 20,008 20,281 (273)
Consolidated Supreme Court Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances and related expenses 10,270 9,888 382
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 6,403 7,168 (765) Operating Costs 3,552 4,631 (1,080) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 5,494 4,557 937 Total Supreme Court 25,718 26,245 (526)
Capital Expenditure Court of Appeal and Trial Division 455 526 (71)
46 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report SUPREME COURT OPERATING STATEMENT For the year ended 30 June 2004
General Comments The financial position of the Court reported in the Operating Statement Probate applications have grown from 14,500 per year to approximately identifies a total budgetary appropriation of $25.557 million and expenditure of 16,000 per year over the last three years. $28.193 million. Within the Recurrent allocation to the Court is an amount of $1,307,000 The revenue performance of the Court has been very healthy. The full year allocated for specific purposes related to Court Security ($250,000), Judicial revenues of $10.954 million exceeded budget expectations by some $1.454 million. Conferences ($100,000), Support staff for Judges ($300,000), Litigation Support This result reflects progressive increases in Court and Probate Fees, set by the Staff ($140,000), Court Maintenance ($150,000), Judicial Texts and References Government, and ongoing growth in applications for letters of administration. ($47,000) and Business Improvement Initiatives ($320,000). These amounts are not separately identified in the Operating Statement.
Surplus/ Budget Actual (Deficit) $'000 $'000 $'000
REVENUE Court Fees, probate, all sources 9,500 10,954 1,454
EXPENDITURE
Court of Appeal Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances nnd related expenses 3,426 3,561 (135)
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 1,688 1,671 18 Operating Costs 248 575 (327) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 784 771 13 Total Court of Appeal 6,146 6,578 (432)
Trial Division Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances and related expenses 7,346 7,568 (222)
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 5,936 5,597 340 Operating Costs 2,549 4,689 (2,140) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 3,580 3,761 (181) Total Trial Division 19,411 21,614 (2,203)
Consolidated Supreme Court Special Appropriations Judicial Salaries, allowances and related expenses 10,772 11,129 (357)
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 7,625 7,267 357 Operating Costs 2,797 5,264 (2,467) Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 4,364 4,532 (168) Total Supreme Court 25,557 28,193 (2,635)
Capital Expenditure Court of Appeal and Trial Division 131 87 44
Supreme Court of Victoria 2003–04 Judges’ Annual Report 47 JURIES DIVISION OPERATING STATEMENT For the year ended 30 June 2003
General Comments The Juries Division is administered by the Supreme Court and supports the operations of both the Supreme and County Courts for jury criminal and civil trials through- out Victoria. It is the practice within the Department of Justice to provide funding allocation to meet the actual costs of the jury service. This typically results in a late year augmentation to the initial budget allocation. This is demonstrated in the accounts by a late provision of $769,000 to meet the costs of a high level of juror activity.
Surplus/ Budget Actual (Deficit) $'000 $'000 $'000 Notes Juries Division Special Appropriations Juror Workers Compensation 17 0 17
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 592 722 (129) 2 Operating Costs (less Juror payments) 289 585 (296) 3 Juror Payments 2,600 2,983 (383) 4 Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 7 10 (3) Additional Funding at end of Financial Year 769 769 5
Total 4,274 4,300 (26) 1
NOTES TO OPERATING STATEMENT 2002–03 1. There is no material difference between the final budget allocation and expenditure. 2. Demonstrates the initial under allocation of budget, which is resolved at Note 5. 3. Demonstrates the initial under allocation of budget, which is resolved at Note 5. 4. Demonstrates the initial under allocation of budget, which is resolved at Note 5. 5. Demonstrates the late year budget allocation to meet the real costs of juries services.
48 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report JURIES DIVISION OPERATING STATEMENT For the year ended 30 June 2004
General Comments The Juries Division is administered by the Supreme Court and supports the operations of both the Supreme and County Courts for jury criminal and civil trials through- out Victoria. For most Victorians, contact with the Juries Commissioner is the only contact they will have with the superior courts. The identification, processing and empan- elment of jurors is a process entirely reactive to the activity of the courts and the cases brought by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) or those instances where a civil trial requires a jury. Currently it is the practice within the Department of Justice to provide funding allocation to meet the actual costs of the jury service. This routinely results in a late year augmentation to the initial budget allocation.
Surplus/ Budget Actual (Deficit) $'000 $'000 $'000 Notes Juries Division Special Appropriations Juror Workers Compensation 17 - 17
Recurrent Staff Salaries and related expenses 760 685 75 Operating Costs (less Juror payments) 412 463 (51) Juror Payments 3,046 3,065 (19) 2 Non-Discretionary (Capital asset and Depreciation charges) 18 20 (2)
Total 4,253 4,232 21 1
NOTES TO OPERATING STATEMENT 2003–04 1. There is no material difference between the budget allocation and final expenditure. 2. The most significant cost in providing jurors is the cost of juror payments, which is set by the Government.
Supreme Court of Victoria 2003–04 Judges’ Annual Report 49 SENIOR MASTER OF THE SUPREME COURT SPECIAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL REPORT for the Year Ended 30 June 2003
50 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 51 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 135,589 74,659 18,164,973 19,663,238 (65,301) (2,864,376) - - Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June Less: Prior Year Unallocated FundsAdd: Current Year Unallocated Funds (13,599) 30,408 (8,184) 13,599 (4,395,003) (1,226,566) 4,731,534 4,395,003 ------Transferred (from)/to General ReserveDistribution to Beneficiaries 1 June 15 - 118,780 69,244 - 17,828,442 16,494,801 - - - - (65,301) (2,864,376) - - - - INVESTMENT REVENUE Interest RevenueDividend IncomeAnnuity IncomeInterest RebateGains on Disposal of InvestmentsTotal Investment RevenueEXPENSES 1(c),2Interest Expense 4(a)Interest Paid on Closed Accounts 1(d) 271,041Dividend Transfer 1(d)Annuity Transfer 118,243 -Interest Rebate 3 - 271,041Loss on Disposal of Investments 22,136,360 -Bank Bill Interest Transferred 118,243 22,718,181Depreciation Expense - 22,136,360 - -Administration Expenses 1(d) 22,718,181 41,169 2,243,495 -Total Expenses 4(b) 2,165,121 1(d) 7,753,013 8,236Funds Available as a Result of Operations 4,559,591 - 1(d) - 4(c) 1(h) - -Comprised of: 4,302,304 - 135,589 3 - 120,718 4,211,777 - - 1(i) - 74,659 - - - 5 94,283 277,175 - - 18,164,973 - - - 4,117,036 19,663,238 - 2,552,470 35,348 - - - 2,353,454 - 2,772,100 - (65,301) 1,298,199 135,452 (2,864,376) - - 1,392,482 - - - 288,280 43,584 - 5,668 - - - 299,530 41,016 - - 3,971,387 - - 3,054,943 - - 3,406,227 - - - 7,818,314 - - - 1,656,080 3,393,588 7,423,967 896,077 - - - - 2,642,424 3,102,361 4,302,304 818,189 - - 4,211,777 1,833,024 ------64,792 - 2,706,801 - 2,563,965 - - - 85,024 3,406,227 - 3,393,588 896,077 - - - 818,189 - - - The accompanying notes form an integral part of the special purpose financial report.
52 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June CURRENT ASSETS CashInterest ReceivableAnnuity Income ReceivablePrepayments 7Debtors 8Investments on Common Account -NON CURRENT ASSETS -Investments on Common Account 6Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account 10 6 -Fixed Assets 9 -Total Assets 4,979,723 16,224 - 1,293,000CURRENT LIABILITIES 1,993,668 - 9 1,151,939 4,235Creditors and Accruals 2,000,623 69,951,428Annuity Income Payable to Beneficiaries - - - 99,990,242Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund 3,234,577 - - 5,697,717Interest income unallocated 13 2,498,592 6,102,240 6,915,810NON CURRENT LIABILITIES 10,842 6,117,478 6 - 12,012,775 11 -Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account - 3,984,927 504,828 10 11,665 - 905,684Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund 12 292,169,090 33,835 6,147,886 262,890 - 1,002,401Total Liabilities 13 4,819,252 229,197,850 3,998,526 1(h) - -Net Assets - 5,674,288 40,927 - 372,345,812 24,642,340 - 338,602,494 - -RESERVES 30,408 18,960,040 - - 32,267,990 -Statutory Reserve - 32,389,557 - - 13,599General Reserve - 90,193,345 - - - - - 75,984,278 Total Reserves - - 4,731,534 - - - - 362,792,745 - 4,395,003 - - - 2,281 - 328,530,922 6,147,886 - - 3,998,526The accompanying notes form an integral part of the special purpose financial report. - 90,159,584 33,761 2,281 372,345,812 - 338,602,494 75,952,627 14 - - - - 31,651 15 59,780 59,780 - 68,221 - - - 116,046 116,046 - - 98,859 - - 90,193,345 75,984,278 ------33,761 - 90,159,584 - 75,952,627 31,651 ------32,208,210 32,273,511 - 3,784,937 - 28,423,273 3,426,010 32,208,210 28,847,501 32,273,511 ------
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 53 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (d) Investments The principal accounting policies adopted in preparing the special purpose Investments are brought to account at cost with related income being recog- financial report are stated to assist in a general understanding of these accounts. nised in the Statement of Financial Performance. Income includes interest and capital This is a special purpose financial report that has been prepared in accordance gains as well as accrued interest. Interest Expenses are the premiums paid on nego- with Australian Accounting Standards and other mandatory reporting requirements tiable securities at the time of purchase. with the exception of the disclosure requirements in the following: Capital gains/(losses), defined as proceeds from sale or realisation of invest- • AASB 1005 Segment Reporting ments, less purchase cost, are transferred to/from the Common Funds Guarantee and • AASB 1017 Related Party Disclosures Reserve Account. • AASB 1026 Statement of Cash Flows Investments on Common Account comprise government, semi-government • AASB 1028 Employee Benefits securities and bonds, prime corporate or bank securities, and bank bills. • AASB 1033 Presentation and Disclosure of Financial Instruments Beneficiaries' Investments – Held on Separate Account (Note 10) comprising The special purpose financial report has been prepared on the basis of historical annuities and equities, are made directly on the individual beneficiary's account and costs and does not take into account changing money values or, except where stated, income arising therefrom (i.e. dividends and annuity income) is credited directly to current valuations of non-current assets. the individual beneficiary’s accounts in Common Fund No. 2. Annuities purchased (a) Nature and purpose of the Common Funds are amortised in equal instalments over the period of the annuity contract. Common Fund No. 1 (e) Salary Costs The prime objective of Common Fund No. 1 is to provide a secure return on The Senior Master of the Supreme Court is not an employer of staff. Salaries and liquid investments for the benefit of the beneficiaries. wages are, however, reimbursed by the Senior Master to the Department of Justice and The Fund consists of: money held in dispute matters; money held as security for respective agencies as appropriate including, when taken, payments for annual leave costs; and other payments made into Court under the provisions of the Trustee and and long service leave entitlements. other Acts. (f) Segment Information Common Fund No. 2 The accounts are prepared on a segmented basis to show the financial position The prime objective of Common Fund No. 2 is to provide the maximum return of each of the Common Funds, the Guarantee and Reserve Account, and the achievable subject to acceptable risk criteria through investment in approved securities. Beneficiaries Investments – Held on Separate Account. The Fund consists of: damages awarded and payments pursuant to compromise (g) Comparative Figures to persons deemed incapable of managing their own affairs due to disability; depend- Where necessary, comparative figures have been expanded to conform to cur- ent minors; and minors having sustained personal injury with entitlement to payment rent year disclosures. out at age 18. (h) Funds Available as a Result of Operations Guarantee and Reserve Account Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 The purpose of the Guarantee and Reserve Account is: The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects the net income (account- • the provision of a statutory reserve of 1 per cent of the value of the ed for on an accruals basis) earned by each of the Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 as Common Funds under the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986; a result of investment activities. This net income is then distributed during the year • the provision for and payment of the administrative expenses of the primarily via the 1 June income distribution process. The net income includes interest Senior Master's Office; rebates transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account and interest subsidies, as • the smoothing of the annual crediting rate of interest paid to beneficiaries required, transferred from the Guarantee and Reserve Account to the Common Funds. of the Common Funds; and At 1 June each year, distributions are made from Common Funds No. 1 and • the provision for and payment of other expenses incurred by the Common No. 2 to the respective beneficiaries. This is initiated by the declaration of respective Funds as considered appropriate by the Senior Master. Losses made on the interest rates by the Senior Master. sale or realisation of Common Fund investments have been reimbursed At 30 June each year there are Unallocated Funds that consist of net investment from this account. income (i.e. interest) earned and either received or receivable during June. This The Guarantee and Reserve Account derives income from investments made amount is shown as a current liability in the Statement of Financial Position indicat- from the Account and from net gains on sale or realisation of investments in Common ing that the funds will be distributed in some form during the following 12 months. Funds No. 1 and No. 2. These funds will not be allocated to beneficiaries until the following 1 June (although Investments Held on Separate Account some distributions may be made during the year as a result of beneficiaries leaving With a view to providing a measure of capital growth, a hedge against inflation, the fund). Consequently, the Funds Available as a Result of Operations is shown as and to offset taxation liability, it is appropriate for part of the assets of certain benefici- comprising: aries to be invested outside Common Fund No. 2. • the annual distributions made to beneficiaries at the rate declared by the Investments outside Common Fund No. 2 are presently limited to Australian Senior Master on 1 June each year based on the net interest balance (cash Equities and Indexed Annuities. Portfolios are regularly reviewed so as to suit the basis) at 31 May. This balance is the result of cash movements for the needs and circumstances of individual beneficiaries. year 1 June to 31 May; and Investments held on separate account are registered in the name of the Senior • the net interest revenue received and receivable from 1 June to 30 June. Master of the Supreme Court but in a manner which specifically identifies the individ- Due to the timing differences (i.e. 1 June income distribution year vs 30 June ual upon whose behalf the investment is held. financial year) the prior year and current year Unallocated Funds are reflected in the (b) Basis of Accounting Funds Available as a Result of Operations reconciliation. The accounts have been prepared on an accruals basis and are recorded at Guarantee and Reserve Account historical cost. The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects all investment and operat- (c) Revenue ing revenues and expenses. For Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2, revenue is defined as income earned from (i) Depreciation of Computer and Office Equipment investment activities of the funds accounted for on an accruals basis. It includes inter- Depreciation is calculated on a straight line basis to write off the net cost of each est from fixed interest securities and any transfers of interest from the Guarantee and item of computer and office equipment over its expected life. Estimates of remaining Reserve Account to the Common Funds. useful lives are made on a regular basis for all assets. The expected useful lives are as For the Guarantee and Reserve Account, revenue also includes gains on sale or follows: realisation of investments made by Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2, which are • Computer Equipment 3 years required to be transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account. • Office Equipment 4 years
54 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2. INTEREST REVENUE Bank AccountFixed Interest SecuritiesBank Bill Interest receivedTotal Interest Revenue3. INTEREST REBATE Interest transfer pursuant to S113(16) of the Supreme Court Act. Interest rebates were paid from the Common Funds No. 1 and 2 to Guarantee and Reserve Account. Total Interest Rebate 11,989 220,247 271,041 38,805 4,235 118,243 114,008 - 22,136,360 18,915,812 22,718,181 20,238,509 338,434 2,882,114 2,243,495 2,165,121 1,833,024 2,132,641 646,648 (94,283) 1,899,938 (35,348) 74,108 36,746 (1,298,199) - 157,759 107,424 - (5,668) - 1,392,482 - - - 41,016 - - - -
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 55 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 4(a) GAINS ON DISPOSAL OF INVESTMENTS All capital profits made on the realisation of a Common Fund investment are credited to the Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account pursuant to S113(17) of the Supreme Court Act. Capital Gains realised Capital Gains transferred (to)/fromTotal Capital Gains on Disposal of Investments4(b) LOSS ON DISPOSAL OF INVESTMENTS Capital losses incurred on realisation of any -Common Fund investment are met from the (220,247)Common Fund Guarantee and Reserve Account pursuant to S113(18)(a) of the Supreme Court - 220,247Act. -Capital Losses incurred Capital Losses transferred (to)/from (3,749,630) - -Total Capital Losses on Disposal of Investments (2,124,774) 3,749,630 3,969,877 2,124,774 2,124,774 - - 4,117,036 147,159 2,353,454 - 228,680 ------` - 1,425,621 (1,656,080) - (1,425,621) (2,642,424) 1,794,699 - (1,794,699) (1,425,621) (1,794,699) (230,459) - (847,725) - - - - -
56 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 4(c) BANK BILL INTEREST TRANSFERRED The Senior Master may exercise authority, pur- suant to S113(20) of the Supreme Court Act, transfer capital profits [Note 4(a)] back from the Common Fund Guarantee and Reserve Account to a Common Fund Account. This authority was exercised during the year for Common Fund Bank Bill capital profits, i.e., receipts in the nature of interest. (The capital profits transferred back are shown at Note 2 – ’Bank Bill Interest received’.) Total Bank Bill Interest Transferred5. ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES The following expenses incurred in administer- ing the Common Funds are paid from 220,247Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account at the Senior Master’s discretion and pursuant to S113(18)(c)of the Supreme Court Act. -Salaries and wages (Note 1 (e)) 2,882,144Consultants fees 1,883,024Audit feesComputer and office equipment (3,102,361) (1,833,024)Stationery and office suppliesBank chargesOther general expensesTotal Administration Expenses ------1,901,710 - - 1,898,602 - - - - 109,071 - - 535,411 - 27,343 - 93,092 - 2,706,801 403,484 2,563,965 - 24,654 26,500 97,895 - - 26,000 8,871 110,590 - - - 7,543 ------
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 57 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 4,979,723 1,993,668 362,120,518 329,188,092 30,744,580 30,972,815 - - 6. INTEREST RECEIVABLE Fixed Interest SecuritiesAnnuitiesTotal Interest Receivable7. PREPAYMENTS Share OfferAdministration ExpensesTotal Prepayments8. DEBTORS 16,224GST imputation credits 16,224Total Debtors 4,235 4,2359. INVESTMENTS ON COMMON ACCOUNT Bank Bills 3,234,577 3,234,577Bonds - 2,498,592 2,498,592Total Investments on Common Account - 504,828 504,828Comprised of - - - 262,890Current (matures < 1 year) 4,979,723 262,890 -Non Current (matures > 1 year) 1,993,668 - 33,761 362,120,518 - - 329,188,092 - 31,651 30,744,580 1,293,000 - 30,972,815 - 1,293,000 - - 4,979,723 - - 1,993,668 - - 4,979,723 - - - - 1,993,668 49,791,328 - - 10,842 64,285,792 - 10,842 69,951,428 - 11,655 - 99,990,242 - - 11,655 - - - 6,102,240 - 292,169,090 312,329,190 12,012,775 33,835 - - 229,197,850 - 2,987,769 264,902,300 33,761 - 40,927 24,642,340 30,744,580 27,985,046 33,835 18,960,040 31,651 - - 40,927 ------
58 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 $$$ Equities Annuities Total 78,462,429 10,544,314 89,006,743 Shares received in lieu of dividendsAmortisation of annuities in current year 1,743,824 - - (590,983) 1,743,824 (590,983) 10. 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 a Common Fund (Note 1(a)). Opening balance at 1 July Investments purchased during the yearInvestments disposed of during the yearClosing balance at 30 June 16,737,648 (3,683,532) 65,408,313 80,206,253 10,544,314 - - 9,953,331 75,952,627 16,737,648 (3,683,532) 90,159,584
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 59 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 11. FIXED ASSETS Computer EquipmentLess: Accumulated DepreciationComputer Equipment Written Down ValueOffice EquipmentLess: Accumulated DepreciationOffice Equipment Written Down ValueTotal Fixed Assets Written Down Value -12. CREDITORS AND ACCRUALS -Salaries and wages -Consultancy -Audit fees -Other - - -Total Creditors and Accruals - - -13. AMOUNTS OWING TO BENEFICIARIES - -Current (payable < 1 year) - -Non Current (payable > 1 year) - -Total Amounts Owing to Beneficiaries - - - 49,371 - - - - 65,680 - 6,117,478 (295,026) - 3,984,927 - - - (244,564) 367,611,997 344,397 - - 6,117,478 334,205,210 - 18,850 - 3,984,927 310,244 - 68,221 - (45,342) - - 33,179 - 98,859 - 4,819,252 (31,013) 2,281 - - - - 5,674,288 64,192 - - - 2,281 - - - 362,792,745 64,192 - - - 328,530,922 - - 59,780 - 90,159,584 - 2,281 75,952,627 - 116,046 - - 7,016 - - 2,281 - - - 85,084 23,907 - - 26,500 2,357 - - - 26,000 - 90,159,584 4,962 - 75,952,627 ------
60 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate - - - - 28,488,574 31,711,877 - - Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 14. STATUTORY RESERVE The Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account maintains a Statutory Reserve at 1% of the Common Funds pursuant to S113(20) of Supreme Court Act. Opening balance at 1 July Add: Transfer from General Reserve (Note 15)Closing Balance at 30 June15. GENERAL RESERVE 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 Common Fund beneficiaries pursuant to S113(20) of the - -Supreme Court Act -Opening balance at 1 JulyLess: Transferred to Statutory Reserve (Note 14) - - -Closing balance at 30 June - - - - 358,927 - - 117,775 - - 3,426,010 3,784,937 3,308,235 3,426,010 ------(358,927) - - (117,775) - 28,847,501 31,829,652 - - 28,423,273 28,847,501 - - - - - Add/(Subtract) Surplus/(Deficit) - - - - (65,301) (2,864,376) - -
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2003 61 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2003 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 2003 2002 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June accounts ’ and non-award ’ (relating to daily requirements, domestic, medical, educational, recreational and other expenses deemed appropriate.) (relating to asset purchases on behalf of beneficiaries.) AND NON AWARD ACCOUNTS – ON COMMON ACCOUNT – Recurring expenses– Capital items– Taxation - - 18,806,210 - 17,829,965 - - 8,936,617 5,518,607 - 3,673,193 5,041,256 accounts in respect of – Court order – Other Amounts paid from beneficiaries 3,663,300 1,613,323 1,324,831 59,050,231 1,023,295 37,005,306 1,089,085 222,145 16. PAYMENTS MADE TO/FROM BENEFICIARIES Amounts paid into beneficiaries (not applicable) (not applicable) – Payouts on closed accounts– Normal payments from beneficiaries’ accounts: -Amounts paid from non-award accounts – Payouts on closed accounts -– Taxation, Receiver of Revenue and sundry expenses 7,231,254 48,262 11,136,069 402,138 2,925,610 431,416 - - - -
62 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report SENIOR MASTER OF THE SUPREME COURT SPECIAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL REPORT for the Year Ended 30 June 2004
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 63 AUDITOR-GENERAL’S REPORT
64 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 138,229 135,589 18,915,387 18,164,973 965,593 (65,301) - - Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June Less: Prior Year Unallocated FundsAdd: Current Year Unallocated Funds (30,408) 32,745 (13,599) 30,408 (4,731,534) (4,395,003) 4,536,216 4,731,534 ------Transferred (from)/to General ReserveDistribution to Beneficiaries 1 June 15 - 135,892 118,780 - 19,110,705 17,828,442 - - - - 965,593 (65,301) - - - - INVESTMENT REVENUE Interest RevenueDividend IncomeAnnuity IncomeInterest RebateGains on Disposal of InvestmentsTotal Investment RevenueEXPENSES 1(c),2Interest Expense 4(a)Interest Paid on Closed Accounts 1(d) 286,872Dividend Transfer 1(d)Annuity Transfer 271,041 -Interest Rebate 3 - 286,872Loss on Disposal of Investments 21,805,536 -Bank Bill Interest Transferred 271,041 22,136,360Depreciation Expense - 21,805,536 - -Administration Expenses 1(d) 22,136,360 28,016 1,954,503 -Total Expenses 4(b) 2,243,495 1(d) 9,003,498 41,169Funds Available as a Result of Operations 7,753,013 - 1(d) - 4(c) 1(h) - -Comprised of: 4,810,115 - 138,229 165,409 3 - 4,302,304 - - 1(i) 135,589 - - - 120,627 120,718 - 5 - - 18,915.387 - - 18,164,973 94,283 - 5,378,513 - 1,174,885 - - - 4,117,036 - 2,552,470 965,593 - - 1,549,855 148,643 - (65,301) - 1,298,199 1,670,482 - - 135,452 - 54,370 - 1,392,482 - - - - 2,890,149 288,280 - 3,971,387 - - - - - 3,920,550 - 8,037,905 - - - - - 3,406,227 7,818,314 - 586,117 889,565 - - 1,656,080 4,810,115 4,513,863 - 896,077 - - 4,302,304 3,102,361 - - - - - 48,999 2,834,556 - - - 2,706,801 - - 64,792 3,920,550 3,406,227 - - 889,565 - - 896,077 - - - The accompanying notes form an integral part of the special purpose financial report.
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 65 STATEMENT OF FINANCIAL POSITION For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June CURRENT ASSETS CashInterest ReceivableAnnuity Income ReceivablePrepayments 7Debtors 8Investments on Common Account -NON CURRENT ASSETS -Investments on Common AccountBeneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account 6 -Fixed Assets 10 6 - 9Total Assets 4,977,670 15,974 -CURRENT LIABILITIES 4,979,723 - 9 -Creditors and Accruals 16,224 593,734 185,251,528 -Annuity Income Payable to Beneficiaries 1,151,939 1,293,000 -Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund 3,171,022 69,951,428 - -Interest income unallocated 5,506,061 3,234,577 11,985,500 13NON CURRENT LIABILITIES 5,522 - 5,554,633 5,697,717 6,102,240 6Beneficiaries’ Investments Held on Separate Account - - 11 428,271 10,13 6,117,478 10,842Amounts owing to beneficiaries – Common Fund - 35,587 692,246 204,104,425 12 504,828Total Liabilities 5,587,378 4,885,324 - 13 292,169,090 6,147,886 -Net Assets 905,684 - 33,835 - 1(h) - 398,033,036 4,819,252 20,047,015 - -RESERVES 372,345,812 - 32,745 24,642,340 - -Statutory Reserve 33,233,509 - 32,267,990 - - -General Reserve 30,408 - - 94,652,162 - - -Total Reserves - 90,193,345 - - 4,536,216 - - - 388,611,496 - - - - 4,731,534 - - 362,792,745 5,587,378 - -The accompanying notes form an integral part of the special purpose financial report. - 6,147,886 - 94,615,161 398,033,036 37,001 - 372,345,812 - 90,159,584 14 - 2,281 - - 33,761 15 59,706 - 39,368 - 59,706 - - - 59,780 - - 68,221 - 59,780 94,652,162 - 90,193,345 ------94,615,161 37,001 - - - 90,159,584 - 33,761 ------33,173,803 - 32,208,210 - 4,036,204 - 29,137,599 3,784,937 33,173,803 28,423,273 32,208,210 ------
66 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies gains as well as accrued interest. Interest Expenses are the premiums paid on nego- The principal accounting policies adopted in preparing the special purpose tiable securities at the time of purchase. financial report are stated to assist in a general understanding of these accounts. Capital gains/(losses), defined as proceeds from sale or realisation of invest- This is a special purpose financial report that has been prepared in accordance ments, less purchase cost, are transferred to/from the Common Funds Guarantee and with Australian Accounting Standards and other mandatory reporting requirements Reserve Account. with the exception of the disclosure requirements in the following: Investments on Common Account comprise government, semi-government • AASB 1005 Segment Reporting securities and bonds, prime corporate or bank securities, and bank bills. • AASB 1017 Related Party Disclosures Beneficiaries' Investments – Held on Separate Account (Note 10) comprising • AASB 1026 Statement of Cash Flows annuities and equities, are made directly on the individual beneficiary's account and • AASB 1028 Employee Benefits income arising therefrom (i.e. dividends and annuity income) is credited directly to • AASB 1033 Presentation and Disclosure Financial Instruments the individual beneficiary’s accounts in Common Fund No. 2. Annuities purchased • AASB 1044 Contingent Liabilities (Employee Benefits) are amortised in equal instalments over the period of the annuity contract. The special purpose financial report has been prepared on the basis of historical (e) Salary Costs costs and does not take into account changing money values or, except where stated, The Senior Master of the Supreme Court is not an employer of staff. Salaries and current valuations of non-current assets. wages are, however, reimbursed by the Senior Master to the Department of Justice and (a) Nature and purpose of the Common Funds respective agencies as appropriate including, when taken, payments for annual leave Common Fund No. 1 and long service leave entitlements. The prime objective of Common Fund No. 1 is to provide a secure return on (f) Segment Information liquid investments for the benefit of the beneficiaries. The accounts are prepared on a segmented basis to show the financial position The Fund consists of: money held in dispute matters; money held as security for of each of the Common Funds, the Guarantee and Reserve Account, and the costs; and other payments made into Court under the provisions of the Trustee and Beneficiaries Investments – Held on Separate Account. other Acts. (g) Comparative Figures Common Fund No. 2 Where necessary, comparative figures have been reclassified to conform to cur- The prime objective of Common Fund No. 2 is to provide the maximum return rent year disclosures. achievable subject to acceptable risk criteria through investment in approved securities. (h) Funds Available as a Result of Operations The Fund consists of: damages awarded and payments pursuant to compromise Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 to persons deemed incapable of managing their own affairs due to disability; depend- The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects the net income (account- ent minors; and minors having sustained personal injury with entitlement to payment ed for on an accruals basis) earned by each of the Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2 as out at age 18. a result of investment activities. This net income is then distributed during the year Guarantee and Reserve Account primarily via the 1 June income distribution process. The net income includes interest The purpose of the Guarantee and Reserve Account is: rebates transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account and interest subsidies, as • the provision of a statutory reserve of 1 per cent of the value of the required, transferred from the Guarantee and Reserve Account to the Common Funds. Common Funds under the provisions of the Supreme Court Act 1986; At 1 June each year, distributions are made from Common Funds No. 1 and • the provision for and payment of the administrative expenses of the No. 2 to the respective beneficiaries. This is initiated by the declaration of respective Senior Master's Office; interest rates by the Senior Master. • the smoothing of the annual crediting rate of interest paid to beneficiaries At 30 June each year there are Unallocated Funds that consist of net investment of the Common Funds; and income (i.e. interest) earned and either received or receivable during June. This • the provision for and payment of other expenses incurred by the Common amount is shown as a current liability in the Statement of Financial Position indicat- Funds as considered appropriate by the Senior Master. Losses made on the ing that the funds will be distributed in some form during the following 12 months. sale or realisation of Common Fund investments have been reimbursed These funds will not be allocated to beneficiaries until the following 1 June (although from this account. some distributions may be made during the year as a result of beneficiaries leaving The Guarantee and Reserve Account derives income from investments made the fund). Consequently, the Funds Available as a Result of Operations is shown as from the Account and from net gains on sale or realisation of investments in Common comprising: Funds No. 1 and No. 2. • the annual distributions made to beneficiaries at the rate declared by the Investments Held on Separate Account Senior Master on 1 June each year based on the net interest balance (cash With a view to providing a measure of capital growth, a hedge against inflation, basis) at 31 May. This balance is the result of cash movements for the and to offset taxation liability, it is appropriate for part of the assets of certain benefici- year 1 June to 31 May; and aries to be invested outside Common Fund No. 2. • the net interest revenue received and receivable from 1 June to 30 June. Investments outside Common Fund No. 2 are presently limited to Australian Due to the timing differences (i.e. 1 June income distribution year vs 30 June Equities and Indexed Annuities. Portfolios are regularly reviewed so as to suit the financial year) the prior year and current year Unallocated Funds are reflected in the needs and circumstances of individual beneficiaries. Funds Available as a Result of Operations reconciliation. Investments held on separate account are registered in the name of the Senior Guarantee and Reserve Account Master of the Supreme Court but in a manner which specifically identifies the individ- The Funds Available as a Result of Operations reflects all investment and operat- ual upon whose behalf the investment is held. ing revenues and expenses. (b) Basis of Accounting (i) Depreciation of Computer and Office Equipment The accounts have been prepared on an accruals basis and are recorded at Depreciation is calculated on a straight line basis to write off the net cost of each historical cost. item of computer and office equipment over its expected life. Estimates of remaining (c) Revenue useful lives are made on a regular basis for all assets. The expected useful lives are as For Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2, revenue is defined as income earned follows: from investment activities of the funds accounted for on an accruals basis. It includes • Computer Equipment 3 years interest from fixed interest securities and any transfers of interest from the Guarantee • Office Equipment 4 years and Reserve Account to the Common Funds. (j) Impacts of adopting AASB equivalents to IASB standards For the Guarantee and Reserve Account, revenue also includes gains on New accounting standard AASB 1047, ‘Disclosing the Impacts of Adopting sale or realisation of investments made by Common Funds No. 1 and No. 2, which are Australian Equivalents to International Financial Reporting Standards’ applies to required to be transferred to the Guarantee and Reserve Account. annual reporting periods ending on or after 30 June 2004. AASB 1047 will cease to (d) Investments apply upon the adoption of the Australian equivalents. Disclosure of the anticipated Investments are brought to account at cost with related income being recog- impacts of adopting the Australian equivalents is made at Note 16. nised in the Statement of Financial Performance. Income includes interest and capital
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 67 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 2. INTEREST REVENUE Bank AccountBank Bill InterestFixed Interest SecuritiesTotal Interest Revenue3. INTEREST REBATE Interest transfer pursuant to S113(16) of the Supreme Court Act. Interest rebates were paid from the Common Funds No. 1 and 2 to Guarantee and Reserve Account. Total Interest Rebate 286,872 42,090 244,782 - 271,041 232,236 38,805 21,805,536 22,136,360 4,296,091 310,832 - 1,954,503 2,867,209 2,243,495 17,198,613 338,434 (120,627) 18,930,717 236,022 (94,283) 47,821 (1,549,855) 1,670,660 53,573 - (1,298,199) 2,153,176 36,746 1,670,482 1,392,482 ------
68 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 4(a) GAINS ON DISPOSAL OF INVESTMENTS All capital profits made on the realisation of a Common Fund investment are credited to the Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account pursuant to S113(17) of the Supreme Court Act. Capital Gains realised Capital Gains transferred (to)/fromTotal Capital Gains on Disposal of Investments4(b) LOSS ON DISPOSAL OF INVESTMENTS Capital losses incurred on realisation of any Common Fund investment may be met by the -Direction of the Senior Master from (245,032) Common Fund Guarantee and Reserve Account (220,247)pursuant to S113(18)(a) of the Supreme Court - 245,032Act. (4,880,784) (3,749,630) 220,247 5,125,816Capital Losses incurred 3,969,877Capital Losses transferred (to)/from 4,880,784 -Total Capital Losses on Disposal of Investments 3,749,630 - - 252,697 - 5,378,513 147,159 4,117,036 ------239,200 (239,200) 1,425,621 - (1,425,621) (586,117) (239,200) (1,656,080) (346,917) (1,425,621) (230,459) ------
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 69 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 4(c) BANK BILL INTEREST TRANSFERRED S113(20) of the Supreme Court Act, to transfer capital profits [Note 4(a)] back from the Common Fund Guarantee and Reserve Account to a Common Fund Account. This authority was exer- cised during the year for Common Fund Bank Bill capital profits, i.e., receipts in the nature of inter- est. [Bank Bill Interest at Note 2 is different to the disclosure in this Note as 2 reports interest on a receivable (accruals) basis while this Note reports the actual transfers of interest made upon maturity.] Total Bank Bill Interest Transferred 245,032 220,247 4,268,831 2,882,144 (4,513,863) (3,102,361) - -
70 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 5. ADMINISTRATION EXPENSES The following expenses incurred in administer- ing the Common Funds are paid from Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account at the Senior Master’s discretion and pursuant to S113(18)(c) of the Supreme Court Act. Audit feesBank chargesBooks publications and subscriptionsClient liaison and office travelComputer and office equipmentConsultants feesMotor vehiclesPostageSalaries and wages [Note 1 (e)] Staff trainingStationery and office supplies -Sundries including legal and investment costsTotal Administration Expenses - - -6. INTEREST RECEIVABLE - -Bank BillsFixed Interest Securities - -Annuities ------Total Interest Receivable ------15,278 ------16,030 - 15,974 - 9,969 101,675 - - 15,974 - 27,300 16,224 - - 9,483 109,071 - - 2,964 3,171,023 16,224 - - 26,500 - - 2,050,748 8,871 22,106 - 3,234,577 - 503,888 1,901,710 - 193,931 2,977,092 - - 48,215 19,989 535,411 428,271 - - 2,834,556 18,241 - 3,067,906 - 2,706,801 166,671 504,828 - - 49,852 10,333 17,234 - - 17,320 412,126 - 37,001 16,145 - - - 10,109 504,828 - - - 9,060 33,761 ------37,001 33,761
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 71 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 4,977,670 4,979,723 389,355,953 362,120,518 32,032,515 30,744,580 - - Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 7. PREPAYMENTS Share OfferAdministration ExpensesTotal Prepayments8. DEBTORS GST imputation creditsTotal Debtors9. INVESTMENTS ON COMMON ACCOUNT Bank BillsFixed Interest SecuritiesTotal Investments on Common Account -Comprised of - -Current (matures < 1 year) 4,977,670Non Current (matures > 1 year) - 4,979,723 - 389,355,953 - - 362,120,518 32,032,515 - 30,744,580 - - - 4,977,670 - - 4,979,723 - 1,293,000 4,977,670 1,293,000 - - - 100,587,433 4,979,723 - - 49,791,328 5,522 185,251,528 288,768,520 5,522 - - 69,951,428 312,329,190 10,842 - 6,968,620 - - 10,842 11,985,500 25,063,895 204,104,425 30,744,580 6,102,240 35,587 - - - 292,169,090 - - 33,835 20,047,015 35,587 24,642,340 - - - 33,835 ------
72 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Equities Annuities Total $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 83,424,519 78,462,429 9,809,021 10,544,314 93,233,540 89,006,743 10. BENEFICIARIES’ INVESTMENTS HELD ON SEPARATE ACCOUNT A corresponding liability is booked to reflect the Senior Master’s responsibility for management of beneficiaries’ funds. A corresponding liability for Interest Receivable on Annuities is also booked (Note 6). These investments do not form part of a Common Fund [Note 1(a) refers]. Opening balance at 1 July Investments purchased during the yearInvestments disposed of during the yearClosing balance at 30 June 15,620,999 (12,402,733) 16,737,648 80,206,253 (3,683,532) 65,408,313 (144,310) 9,953,331 - 10,544,314 85,622,338 - 80,206,253 90,159,584 (12,547,043) 8,992,823 75,952,627 - (3,683,532) 9,953,331 15,620,999 94,615,161 90,159,584 16,737,648 Shares received in lieu of dividendsAmortisation of annuities in current year 2,197,819 1,743,824 - - - (816,198) - (590,983) 2,197,819 (816,198) 1,743,824 (590,983)
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 73 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Expense Balance Reserve Account Account 49,37118,850 20,146 - 38,934 - 30,583 10,065 8,785 68,22165,679 20,14633,18098,859 34,154 - 34,154 - - 48,999 - - 39,368 50,462 49,371 64,792 14,330 68,221 18,850 Opening Additions Disposals Depreciation Closing No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June Office Equipment 11. FIXED ASSETS Computer EquipmentLess: Accumulated DepreciationComputer Equipment Written Down ValueOffice EquipmentLess: Accumulated DepreciationOffice Equipment Written Down ValueTotal Fixed Assets Written Down Value -Reconciliations of the carrying amounts for both classes of Fixed Assets: ------2004: - -Computer Equipment ------30,583 - - - 49,371 (333,960) - - (295,026) - 364,543 - 344,397 8,785 - 39,368 (55,407) - - 18,850 (45,342) 68,221 - - 64,192 - 64,192 ------2003: Computer Equipment Office Equipment
74 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 12. CREDITORS AND ACCRUALS Salaries and wagesConsultancyAudit feesOtherTotal Creditors and Accruals13. AMOUNTS OWING TO BENEFICIARIES Current (payable < 1 year)Non Current (payable > 1 year)Total Amounts Owing to Beneficiaries - - 5,554,663 6,117,478 - 393,496,820 - 5,554,663 367,611,997 - - 6,117,478 - - - 4,885,324 - - - 4,819,252 - - - - 388,611,496 2,281 - - 362,792,745 - 94,615,161 - 90,159,584 59,706 - - 23,640 59,780 - - - 7,016 2,281 7,354 27,300 23,907 - - 1,412 - 26,500 - 94,615,161 90,159,584 2,357 ------
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 75 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate - - - - 28,488,574 31,711,877 - - Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June Add/(Subtract) Surplus/(Deficit) - - - - 965,593 (65,301) - - 14. STATUTORY RESERVE The Common Funds Guarantee and Reserve Account maintains a Statutory Reserve at 1% of the Common Funds pursuant to S113(20) of Supreme Court Act. Opening balance at 1 July Add: Transfer from General Reserve (Note 15)Closing Balance at 30 June15. GENERAL RESERVE 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 Common Fund beneficiaries pursuant to S113(20) of the Supreme Court Act. - - -Opening balance at 1 JulyLess: Transferred to Statutory Reserve (Note 14) - - -Closing balance at 30 June - - - - 251,267 - - 358,927 - - 3,784,937 4,036,204 3,426,010 3,784,937 ------(251,267) - - (358,927) - 28,423,273 28,847,501 - - 29,137,599 28,423,273 - - - - -
76 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 ts the ss at ese ears eciated nds to any om changes in 1986 include the transfer to Senior Master of all funds held in trust for persons under a disability by County Court, lassified as available for sale must be carried at fair value. Unrealised gains or losses may recognised either in income the valuation basis of any class asset or methodology frequency at which revaluations may be performed. The financial l assets regardless of whether they are measured on a cost or fair value basis. Where the carrying amount an asset exceeds i of impairment exist, the carrying value will need to be assessed for each year. If indicators at cost or fair value. Non-current assets measured value will be required to revalued least every three five y ossible changes in measurement of assets or liabilities. Any such would not be expected to have a material impact. hich is the higher of its value-in-use and fair value less costs to sell. For Office, in use an asset depr carrying amounts are, or are not, in excess of the recoverable value instrument. will no longer hold equities on separate account for selected beneficiaries. he extent that the write down can be debited to an asset revaluation reserve amount applicable asset. Any impairment lo IFRS are being reviewed. rformance following adoption of the requirements Australian equivalents to IFRS (the new standards) have been identified. Th of transactions within the Senior Master’s (Funds in Court) Office. against accumulated funds at the transition date. becomes the transition date for Senior Master (if were a ‘reporting entity’). Any adjustments arising fr al reporting requirements of the Australian equivalents to International Reporting Standards (IFRS). This requirement also exte Supreme Court Act 2004 became effective on 1 July 2004. Amendments to section 113 of the and all assets in a class must be revalued at the same time. It has not yet been concluded whether any changes will made to effects of any such changes are necessarily unknown. carrying value of an asset will need to be assessed ensure that the does not exceed its recoverable amount, w replacement cost. As the Senior Master does not have inventories, impairment testing will apply only to all non-current physica recoverable amount, the difference will be written off as impairment loss in statement of financial performance except to t transition date will be adjusted against the accumulated funds. Valuation of Assets. The new standard continues to offer choice for measuring each class non-current physical assets either Impairment of Assets. Under the new standards, an asset will be required to assessed for impairment each year. If indicators Non-current Investments. Under AASB 139, ‘Financial Instruments: Recognition and Measurement’, financial instruments that are c directly to equity. Current accounting policy is measure non-current investments at cost, with an annual review whether the Courts Legislation (Funds in Court) Act include: comparative financial information included within the report. The first day of period, 1 July 2004, effectively the recognition or measurement of assets and liabilities at transition date arising from adoption IFRS will be made Current accounting policies and the new standards steps to be taken in managing transition Australian equivalents Changes to existing accounting policies that may have a material impact on the Senior Master’s future financial position and pe 16. IMPACTS OF ADOPTING AASB EQUIVALENTS TO IASB STANDARDS For reporting periods beginning on or after 1 January 2005, all Australian entities are required to adopt the financi • • • 17. EVENTS SUBSEQUENT TO REPORTING DATE The Magistrates Court and Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. Completion these transfers will increase significantly the level The legislation has enabled a new Common Fund No. 3 to be created for investment in shares. As consequence, the Senior Master There may be other changes in requirements which could lead to methodology or processes, increased disclosures and p
Senior Master of the Supreme Court Special Purpose Financial Report for the Year Ended 30 June 2004 77 NOTES TO AND FORMING PART OF THE ACCOUNTS For the year ended 30 June 2004 Reserve Account Account No. 1 No. 2 Guarantee and on Separate Common Fund Common Fund Common Funds Investments Held $$ $$ $$ $$ 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 2004 2003 Note 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June 30 June accounts ’ and non award ’ (relating to daily requirements, domestic, medical, educational, recreational and other expenses deemed appropriate.) (relating to asset purchases on behalf of beneficiaries.) AND NON AWARD ACCOUNTS – ON COMMON ACCOUNT – Recurring expenses– Capital items– Taxation - - 20,983,651 - 18,806,210 - - 7,687,649 8,936,617 - 4,081,181 3,673,193 accounts in respect of – Court order – Other Amounts paid from beneficiaries 3,067,470 3,663,300 278,510 47,525,646 1,324,831 59,050,231 296,231 1,089,085 – Payouts on closed accounts– Normal payments from beneficiaries’ accounts: -Amounts paid from non award accounts – Payouts on closed accounts– Taxation, Receiver of Revenue and sundry expenses - 9,226,274 54,506 7,231,254 48,262 3,901,011 2,925,610 - - - - 18. PAYMENTS MADE TO/FROM BENEFICIARIES Amounts paid into beneficiaries (not applicable) (not applicable)
78 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report APPENDICES NAMES OF JUDGES AND MASTERS
Period of Office Period of Office Chief Justice The Honourable Justice Stephen William Kaye 16 December 2003– The Honourable Justice John Harber Phillips, AC 17 December 1991– The Honourable Justice Simon Paul Whelan 17 March 2004– 17 October 2003 (*1984) The Honourable Justice Elizabeth Jane Hollingworth 08 June 2004– The Honourable Justice Marilyn Louise Warren 25 November 2003– (*1998) Reserve Judges President of Court of Appeal The Honourable Mr Justice Norman Michael O’Bryan 07 May 1992– The Honourable Justice Howard Tomaz Nathan 18 April 1997–30 January 2004 The Honourable Mr Justice John Spence Winneke, AC 07 June 1995– The Honourable Justice Rosemary Anne Balmford 13 October 2003– (*1996) Judges of Appeal Masters The Honourable Mr Justice William Frederick Ormiston 07 June 1995– (*1983) Master Philip Lawrence Cain 26 November 1996*– The Honourable Mr Justice John David Phillips 07 June 1995–22 May 2004 (*1990) Senior Master Kevin John Mahony 15 April 1983– The Honourable Justice Stephen Pendrill Charles 07 June 1995– Master Ewan Kenneth Evans 02 August 1983– The Honourable Mr Justice Frank Hortin Callaway 07 June 1995– Master Charles William George Wheeler 31 July 1990– The Honourable Mr Justice John Michael Batt 06 May 1997– (*1994) Master Thomas Peter Bruce 15 July 1973*– The Honourable Justice Peter Buchanan 28 October 1997– Master Kathryn Elizabeth Kings 20 March 1993*– The Honourable Justice Alex Chernov 13 October 1998– (*1997) Master Michael Joseph Louis Dowling, QC 15 May 2001– The Honourable Justice Frank Hollis Rivers Vincent 12 June 2001– (*1985) The Honourable Justice Geoffrey Michael Eames 15 March 2002– (*1992) *Date of first appointment to the Supreme Court. The Honourable Justice Geoffrey Arthur Akeroyd Nettle 08 June 2004– (*2002) Note: The Court of Appeal commenced on 7 June 1995. Judges The Honourable Mr Justice Barry Watson Beach 18 July 1978–15 February 2003 The Honourable Justice Bernard George Teague 13 October 1987– The Honourable Justice Philip Damien Cummins 17 February 1988– The Honourable Justice Thomas Harrison Smith 01 May 1990– The Honourable Justice David John Ashley 21 August 1990– The Honourable Justice John Allen Coldrey 19 February 1991– The Honourable Justice David McCartin Michael Byrne 20 August 1991– The Honourable Justice David Lindsey Harper 11 March 1992– The Honourable Justice Hartley Roland Hansen 06 April 1994– The Honourable Justice Philip Mandie 10 May 1994– The Honourable Justice Rosemary Anne Balmford 06 March 1996–14 September 2003 The Honourable Justice Eugene William Gillard 06 May 1997– The Honourable Justice Murray Bryon Kellam 28 January 1998– The Honourable Justice Bernard Daniel Bongiorno 18 December 2000– The Honourable Justice David John Habersberger 03 July 2001– The Honourable Justice Robert Stanley Osborn 09 May 2002– The Honourable Justice Geoffrey Arthur Akeroyd Nettle 23 July 2002–07 June 2004 The Honourable Justice Julie Anne Dodds-Streeton 23 July 2002– The Honourable Justice Robert Frank Redlich 25 October 2002– The Honourable Justice Katharine Mary Williams 25 October 2002– The Honourable Justice Stuart Ross Morris 09 April 2003–
Appendices 79 SUPREME COURT REGISTRIES
Principal Registry Court of Appeal Registry Juries Division Level 2 Ground Floor Ground Floor 436 Lonsdale Street 450 Little Bourke Street 250 William Street MELBOURNE VIC 3000 MELBOURNE VIC 3000 MELBOURNE VIC 3000 Tel: (03) 9603 9300 Civil Tel: (03) 9603 6031 Tel: (03) 8636 6810 Fax: (03) 9603 9400 Criminal Tel: (03) 9603 6045 Fax: (03) 8636 6829 Ausdoc: DX 210608 Fax: (03) 9603 6050 Ausdoc: DX 210608 Ausdoc: DX 210608 Ballarat Registry Mildura Registry 100 Grenville Street South 56 Deakin Avenue (PO Box 604) (PO Box 5014) BALLARAT VIC 3350 MILDURA VIC 3500 Tel: 5336 6200 Tel: 5021 6000 Fax: 5336 6213 Fax: 5021 6010 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 Tel : 5440 4140 Tel: 5144 2888 Fax: 5440 4162 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 Tel : 5225 3333 Tel: 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 Tel : 5572 2288 Tel: 5721 0900 Fax: 5572 1653 Fax 5721 5483 Ausdoc: DX 216376 Ausdoc: DX 219436 Horsham Registry Warrnambool Registry 22 Roberts Avenue 218 Koroit Street (PO Box 111) (PO Box 244) HORSHAM VIC 3400 WARRNAMBOOL VIC 3280 Tel : 5352 4444 Tel: 5564 1111 Fax: 5362 4454 Fax: 5564 1100 Ausdoc: DX 216519 Ausdoc: DX 219592
80 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report COMMITTEE ACTIVITIES
Judges often sit on committees with representatives of other courts or mem- The committee met on one occasion during 2003–04 and its membership as bers of the legal profession, and with members of the public who represent users of at 30 June 2004 included the Chief Justice (Chair), Justice Eames, Chief Judge the Court or who have been nominated by government or relevant organisations. In Rozenes, Master Bruce, Senior Deputy Registrar T Kearney, Chief Magistrate Gray such ways (and in a myriad of informal ways) the Court, through its Judges and (or Magistrate Lauritsen), Prof P Williams (nominated by the Attorney-General), Masters, is informed as to the functions and performance of the Court. Law Institute of Victoria representatives M Iudica, M Johnson, D Denby, and The formal committees of the Court include the following: Victorian Bar representatives M Shand QC and C Harvey.
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE LEGAL COSTS COMMITTEE Between meetings of the Council of Judges, the Executive Committee has the The Legal Costs Committee is established by section 114 of the Legal Practice delegated task of management and administration that would otherwise be taken Act 1996. Its members met on one occasion in 2003–04 to consider Practitioner by the full Council. The Chief Justice and President are permanent members of the Remuneration Orders with respect to non-litigious costs. Executive Committee but Judges are elected to three-year terms. The Chief Committee membership as at 30 June 2004 included Chief Justice (Chair), Executive Officer attends when invited by the Chief Justice. Ms M Johnson, Mr A Weingart, Prof P Williams, Mr P Shattlock, Mr N Green Q C The Executive Committee meets, on average, fortnightly. A total of 29 meet- and Mr P Murdoch Q C, including Mr N Gill as secretary of the committee. ings were conducted during the reporting period. There are many sub-committees that operate under the aegis of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee JUDICIAL OFFICERS’ ensures the efficient functioning of the Court. In particular, the committee oversees ABORIGINAL CULTURAL the budget of the Court. AWARENESS COMMITTEE The members of the Executive Committee in 2003–04 comprised the Chief The Judicial Officers’ Aboriginal Cultural Awareness Committee was created Justice, the President, Nettle, J A, Cummins, J, Bongiorno, J, Habersberger, J, Osborn, in response to one of the recommendations of the Royal Commission into J, Senior Master Mahony and Chief Executive Officer Fin McRae. During the report- Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, which proposed that Judges and Magistrates gain ing period, some of the committee’s key initiatives involved finance, building greater appreciation of the culture of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. maintenance and works, and security. The committee liaises closely with the Australian Institute of Judicial Administration (AIJA). In addition, the committee chair is a member of a national SUPREME COURT LIBRARY committee of the AIJA with a similar objective. COMMITTEE The committee met on 4 December 2003 and as at 30 June 2004, its member- The following appointments were made to the Supreme Court Library ship totalled 15, including judicial members of the Supreme, County and Federal Committee pursuant to the Supreme Court Library Rules: Courts and representatives of the Department of Justice. • Judicial Members – Mr Justice Ormiston (Chair) and Justices Teague, During the reporting period, some of the committee’s key initiatives included Byrne and Mandie a resolution to organise a conference for October 2004 and producing a benchbook • Appointed Members – Mr S McLeish, Ms M Sloss Q C, Mr G R Gronow for use by judicial officers when dealing with Aboriginal persons in court, in con- and Mr E Rodan junction with the Judicial College of Victoria. The Library Committee has several sub-committees, including the: • Finance Sub-Committee with members Justice Teague (Chair), Justice OTHER COMMITTEES Mandie, Mr S McLeish and Mr G R Gronow; and Judges of the Court were members of other committees during the reporting • Books Sub-Committee with members Mr Justice Ormiston (Chair), period as follows: Justices Nettle and Byrne, Mr E Rodan, Mr S McLeish and Mrs R Bird. • The Court-Media Liaison Committee (Justice Teague, Chair). Appointed by the Library Committee, the Investment Committee manages the • Online Services Working Party (Justice Smith, Chair). Library’s Investment Fund and comprises Justice Mandie (Chair) and Justice • Records Management Working Party (Mr Justice Batt and Justice Teague, Mr S E K Hulme Q C, Mr P Kelly and Mr D Williamson. Smith). In addition, the Supreme Court is represented on the Courts’ Libraries • Computers and Technology Committee (Justice Mandie, Chair). Committee. • Probate Users Committee (Justice Harper). During the reporting period, some of the committee’s key initiatives included • Litigation Support Group (Chief Justice). efforts to improve the Library’s financial position, to develop the Library’s collection • Council of Legal Education (Chief Justice, Justices Teague, Cummins, and to increase judicial access to electronic materials. Coldrey, Harper and Williams). • Court Security Committee (Justice Cummins, Chair). COSTS COORDINATION COMMITTEE In 1987, the Costs Coordination Committee was established to coordinate and advise relevant courts regarding applications relating to scales of costs. The com- mittee’s objective is to ensure court system-wide coherence in the scale of costs.
Appendices 81 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Adjourned Sine Die A Latin term for ‘without day’ referring to a proceed- Criminal Division A division of the Court’s Trial Division brought into ing being adjourned to a date to be fixed. effect on 1 February 2000, pursuant to Practice Note 4 Adjournment A procedure to suspend or postpone a hearing to a of 1999. future date. Department Department of Justice. Admiralty List A Judge-controlled List in the Commercial and Equity Directions Hearing A form of preliminary hearing conducted when Division, the List provides specialist management to directions are given for the main hearing to be held cases concerning maritime and associated disputes. at a later date. Affidavit Written statement in the name of a person, called the Funds In Court A discrete, self-funded division of the Court where the deponent, by whom it is voluntarily signed and sworn Senior Master holds, administers and invests all funds to or affirmed. paid into the Court. Appeal An application to a higher court to review the decision Injunction A Court order imposed to make a person do some- thing or refrain from doing something. of a lower court. Intellectual Property A Judge-controlled List in the Commercial and Equity Associate Each Judge and Master has an Associate. The List Division designed to manage proceedings regarding Associate’s duties involve the administrative functions patents, trademarks, copyrights and associated connected with the running of Court hearings. They matters. also act as general assistants to their Judge/Master. Listing Master A specialist judicial officer responsible for listing cases Judges’ Associates wear robes in Court. to be heard in court by fixing dates for trial before the Building Cases List A Judge-controlled List in the Commercial and Equity Judges and drawing up, maintaining and coordinat- Division where a Judge with specialist knowledge in ing these lists of cases. building and construction law manages cases. Litigation Support Overseen by Master Bruce, the Litigation Support CEO The Chief Executive Officer is an officer of the Court Group (LSG) Group (LSG) comprises the support staff from the and is employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Master and the Registry. The LSG manages all Supreme Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector proceedings commenced by Writ that have not been Management and Employment Act 1998. The Chief entered into a specialist List, from the commence- Executive Officer is responsible for the overall admin- ment of the pleadings until the proceeding is referred istration of the Court and oversees all the various to the Listing Master for pre-trial directions. work areas in the Court, with the exception of those Long Cases List Proceedings before the Court that are expected to areas that report directly to the judiciary. exceed 12 sitting days at trial are placed in the Long Circuit Sittings of the Supreme Court, which are held in Cases List. These proceedings are managed by the various regional districts within Victoria other than Listing Master. Melbourne. Major Torts List The Major Torts List is a Judge-controlled List, which Civil List List of civil proceedings awaiting trial before a Judge manages tort litigation from the point of issue to sitting with or without a jury. referral to the Civil List for fixing for trial. Commercial and A division of the Court’s Trial Division brought into Master A Judicial Officer of the Court empowered to perform Equity Division effect on 1 February 2000, pursuant to Practice Note 4 auxiliary judicial duties. Some Masters have specific of 1999. duties, including listing, taxation and criminal Commercial List The Commercial List is a Judge-controlled List, appeals. designed to provide speedy resolution of commercial Mean The mean, commonly known as the arithmetic disputes. average, is computed by adding all the scores in the distribution and dividing by the number of scores. Common Law Division A division of the Court’s Trial Division brought into Median The median is a measure of central tendency. It is the effect on 1 February 2000, pursuant to Practice Note 4 score that divides a distribution exactly in half. of 1999. Exactly one half of the scores are less than or equal to Corporations List A Judge-controlled List in the Commercial and Equity the median, and exactly one half are greater than or Division, the List manages the expeditious resolution equal to the median. Because exactly 50 per cent of of company disputes. the scores fall at or below the median, this value is Court of Appeal Supreme Court when constituted by two or more equivalent to the 50th percentile. Judges. Usually, it is three. It is possible to have more than one Court of Appeal sitting at a time.
82 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report On the Papers Orders made by the Court without the requirement Rules Committee A committee of judicial members and members of the that the parties be present. However, such orders are Bar Council and Law Institute of Victoria appointed agreed to in writing by the parties. by nomination, empowered by section 25 of the Originating Motion A form of process used to commence a proceeding Supreme Court Act 1986 to make Rules of the Court. where required by any Act or by the Rules, and where Security for Costs The Court may, on application of a defendant, order there is no defendant or when it is unlikely that there that security for the costs of the defendant in the will be any substantial dispute of fact between the proceeding be paid by the plaintiff under certain parties in a proceeding. circumstances. Parens Patriae Parent or Protector of the People. Sheriff The Sheriff is an officer of the Court and is employed Pending A case that is awaiting final determination. pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Court Act Percentile The rank or percentile rank of a particular score is 1986 and the Public Sector Management and defined as the percentage of individuals in the distri- Employment Act 1998. bution with scores at or below that particular value. Subpoena A Writ or Summons issued in a proceeding requiring For example, a 75th percentile means that 75 per cent the person to whom it is directed to be present at a of the scores in the distribution are at or below this particular place and time for a specified purpose value. A 90th percentile means that 90 per cent of the under a penalty for non-attendance. scores in the distribution are at or below this value. Tipstaff An Officer of the Court who sits next to the Associate Pleadings Pleadings are a series of written statements and in front of the Judge during court. He or she is exchanged between the parties in a proceeding. responsible for keeping order in the court and will They set out and clarify the claims and defences of the usually swear in or affirm witnesses. parties and help to define the issues that must be Trial Division A division of the Court comprising the Chief Justice determined. and generally about 20 other Judges. The Trial Practice Court A court where short and/or urgent applications can be Division is further divided into three sub-divisions: the made. A Judge presides over the Practice Court. Commercial and Equity Division, Common Law Presentment A document filed in the Court, which describes the Division and Criminal Division. crimes alleged by the prosecution to have been Unrepresented Individuals who do not have legal representation and committed by a defendant. Used by the State Office Litigants who are representing themselves in a proceeding. of Public Prosecutions. Valuation A Judge-controlled List comprising cases relating to Pre-Trial Conference A Pre-Trial Conference is a form of dispute resolution Compensation the valuation of land, compensation for the that usually takes place after a proceeding has been and Planning List acquisition of land and planning appeals from the set down for trial. The conference is normally con- Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). vened by the Prothonotary or the Senior Deputy VCAT Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal. Prothonotary. Victorian Taxation A Judge-controlled List in the Commercial and Equity Probate Proving a Will. It is the Court’s authority that a Will is Appeals Division, where proceedings arise out of objections to valid, allowing the executor to collect the deceased’s an assessment, decision or determination by the assets and so administer the estate according to the Commissioner for State Revenue with respect to terms of the Will. liability for any tax, duty, levy, fee, charge or other Prothonotary The Prothonotary is an officer of the Court and is impost. employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme Warrant An authority under hand and seal of the Court Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management directed to some officer to arrest an offender or and Employment Act 1998. The Prothonotary is also recover property. the Principal Registrar of the Court. He reports to the Writ Document under the seal of the Court commanding Chief Executive Officer. the person to whom it is addressed to do or forbear Registrar of The Registrar is an officer of the Court and is from doing some act. In the Court, most proceedings Probates employed pursuant to section 106 (a) of the Supreme are commenced by Writ. Court Act 1986 and the Public Sector Management and Employment Act 1998. He reports to the Chief Executive Officer.
Appendices 83 FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND WEBSITE
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION THE COURT’S WEBSITE The Court is exempt from the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act Re-launched on 22 May 2003, the new and improved Court website at 1982 (FOI Act) related to Court processes. www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au provides up-to-the-minute information to the The FOI Act outlines a series of exceptions and exemptions that can be used public and the legal profession about the Court, its practices and procedures, lists as grounds to refuse access to documents that fall within certain categories. These and sittings, jury services, selected judgments, publications, support services and categories of exceptions and exemptions are explained below. courtroom technology. Exceptions from Freedom of Information The website benefited from an extensive redesign based on feedback from both the Court’s staff and the public, including: Section 6 Court Documents: • simplified navigation to various areas of the site; The FOI Act does not apply to court documents (i.e. judgments) or documents • access to content via menus, search and a site map; that are created by staff in relation to the functions of a court or tribunal (i.e. court • updated presentation and appearance for enhanced navigation and files or registry documents). usability; Section 14 Documents Available for Purchase/or Inspection: • a non-frames site making it easy to bookmark pages; and Access cannot be granted under the FOI Act to the following documents that • the ability to increase text size through browser settings. are open to public access: In addition, the website includes links to a variety of government, judicial • a part of public register, and can be purchased for a fee pursuant to an and legal websites. enactment (i.e. Land Title Searches/Birth Certificates); • available for purchase via arrangements with an agency (i.e. legislation is available to be purchased at Information Victoria); or • available for inspection at the Public Records Office (i.e. prison files more than 75 years old).
84 Supreme Court of Victoria 2002–04 Judges’ Annual Report Produced by Crystal Corporate Communication Pty Ltd (03) 9593 8797. Printed by Mercedes Waratah Press. Enquiries to: Chief Executive Officer Supreme Court of Victoria 210 William Street Melbourne, Victoria 3000 Tel: (03) 9603 6210 Fax: (03) 9603 6352
This Annual Report is available on our website: www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au
www.supremecourt.vic.gov.au