Acting Registrar: Anne O'Connell
Principal Courts Administrator: Giulia Inga
Principal Courts Administrator: Claude Wotton
Registrar: Tim McGrath
Registrar: Megan Greenwood
Acting Director: Peter Ryan
Chief Executive Officer: Nerida Johnston
The Industrial Registry files matters to be dealt with by the Industrial Relations Commission, the Industrial Relations Commission in Court Session, the Chief Industrial Magistrate and the Industrial Registrar. This year, the overall number of matters filed in the Registry decreased 0.6 per cent this year, with 6,789 matters filed compared to 6,828 in 1998-99.
Applications for relief from alleged unfair dismissal decreased this year, reflecting the impact of changes to regulations which restricted categories of applicants and an increased awareness with the industrial relations community about the legislation. As a consequence, the number of unfair dismissal claims that were resolved fell 26.6 percent this year to 3,518.
The median time for resolution of disputes increased 7.3 per cent to 133 days, compared with 124 days in 1998-99. Industrial disputes continued to retain a priority in the matters coming before the Commission. These matters are usually urgent and require an almost immediate response from the Commission, as the impact of an industrial dispute upon the public can be severe.
Goal: Continuously improve our services and increase satisfaction among our diverse clients.
The IRC introduced changes to procedures for dealing with unfair contracts during the year. The aim of these changes is to reduce the period of time from lodgment to conciliation and simplify the requirements for the filing of evidence to reduce costs and time. Similarly, changes to practices in unfair dismissal cases, including changes to the method of allocation of matters, were introduced as a trial to ascertain whether waiting times can be further reduced. The procedures include a new application form, drafted in such a matter as to avoid common problems experienced by applicants and the Commission. An opportunity for filing a defence is included, aimed at narrowing the issues prior to mandatory conciliation.
The Commission’s premises have been extensively refurbished, allowing lodgement of process before the Industrial Relations Commission and the Commission in Court Session at the same counter area. Other improvements to accommodation and facilities include:
· installing telephone systems to facilitate access to interpreters;
· building three private interview rooms;
· modifying access to all levels of the Commission’s premises to improve access for persons with disabilities; and
· relocating the court of the Chief Industrial Magistrate to the Downing Centre.
There have been greater use of technology by the IRC this year to facilitate the publication of the Industrial Gazette and the earlier dissemination of important industrial information, such as variations to rates of pay and conditions of employment. A specific software application has also been developed to allow awards to be filed in electronic format.
The IRC’s Users Groups continued to meet regularly during the year to discuss procedural reforms relating to unfair dismissal applications, unfair contracts, Occupational Health and Safety prosecutions, appeals and the evidence of expert witnesses. The groups are broad based and representative of the industrial community. It was particularly intended that the cross-section of the industrial community invited to attend was as widely drawn as possible. This approach has already resulted in the implementation of procedural reform relating to unfair contracts and unfair dismissals.
The process of integrating the infrastructure of the former Industrial Relations Court with that of the Industrial Relations Commission has been finalised, with staff from both Registries co-located and a single counter area now accepting process for all purposes of the Industrial Relations Act 1996. The finalisation of the restructure of the two organisations into a single unit has been substantially completed.
THE YEAR AHEAD
The key priorities for the Industrial Relations Commission in the coming year are to:
· reduce delays;
· continue to improve the Registry’s computer systems to improve the effectiveness of case management and improve the accuracy of statistical data;
· provide all judgments in median neutral citation; and
· review settlement procedures to ensure that industrial information is available to the industrial community as quickly as possible.
LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT
The Land and Environment Court has an appellate and a review jurisdiction in relation to planning, building and environmental matters. Jurisdiction is exercised by reference to the nature of the subject matter of the application. This may involve matters that have an impact on community interest as well as matters of Government policy.
Goal: Promote the earliest, most effective and efficient resolution of criminal matters and civil disputes.
The Land and Environment Court maintained its proactive role in case management during the year, streamlining the progress of cases. Nevertheless, at the end of the financial year, there were 1,367 matters on hand, compared to 1,349 for the previous year.
This year, 79 per cent of matters falling within the classes one, two and three of the Courts jurisdiction were disposed of within six months. This falls short of the Courts time standard to dispose of 95 per cent of these matters within six months. In the Court’s criminal jurisdiction, 87 per cent of prosecutions were completed within eight months.
With the permanent appointment of a sixth judge to the Court, the judicial officers have been able to concentrate on the civil remedies, judicial review and summary prosecution areas of the Court’s jurisdiction. This has resulted in a decrease in matters on hand in these areas.
Goal: Continuously improve our services and increase satisfaction among our diverse clients.
A new file tracking and management system was implemented at the Land and Environment Court during the year which has incorporated existing “stand alone” databases. This has improved client services by streamlining listing and diary functions, facilitating records for research and statistical purposes, and improving the efficiency of data entry.
A pilot program for the electronic filing of documents is underway. The primary objective of the pilot is to remove the requirement for solicitors to physically lodge documents with the Court and for the Court to dispense with, as far as possible, the requirement to keep a hard copy of the file of court documents.
THE YEAR AHEAD
The key priorities for the Land and Environment Court for the coming year are to:
· improve client service;
· reduce the number of matters on hand particularly in classes one and three of the Court’s jurisdiction;
· encourage the use of conciliation conferences as well as mediation as a means of dispute resolution;
· encourage the use of video conferencing, particularly from remote locations; and
· expand on electronic document filing and interchange from the initial pilot program to not only include the receipt of documents electronically, but to be able to have them made available at hearing by way of computer terminal.
LOCAL COURTS
Local Courts serve as the court of general access in NSW. More than 90 per cent of people who ever have to attend a court in NSW attend a local court.
Goal: Promote the earliest, most effective and efficient resolution of criminal matters and civil disputes.
The criminal caseload for Local Courts has been increasing steadily over recent years. This year, there were 266,769 new matters, an increase of 0.27 per cent and 267,368 finalised matters, an increase of 0.32 per cent. The State-wide median waiting time to list a defended matter was 14 weeks, compared to 13 weeks over the last three years.
[There has been a decline in workload in the civil claims jurisdiction once again this year. This has been a continuing trend since 1995-96, with a total reduction of 24 per cent of matters finalised in the Small Claims Division and 29 per cent in the General Division since that time. The lower number of matters proceeding to hearing reflects improved case management and the use of diversionary procedures for civil claims, such as providing the parties with access to specialist assessors.
The overall decline in civil claims lodgements was not evenly distributed across the State, with the volume of lodgements at the larger metropolitan registries (and related processing time) remaining high. Significant backlogs for processing of civil claims matters have been experienced at the Downing Centre Civil Claims Registry. In response to this problem, a Quality Team this year trialed a “transportability of work” project which involved sending Downing Centre processing work to a number of other, low volume courts across the State. This project has been very successful and has almost eliminated the backlog. This practice will be extended to other high volume courts.
A joint Local Courts/Community Justice Centre Memorandum of Understanding is designed to increase the number of personal violence and small claims matters which are referred to Community Justice Centres for alternate dispute resolution. This will help to ensure that the members of the public are aware of and can access the most appropriate option to resolve their particular dispute. This should also have a positive impact on court waiting times over the longer term.
Goal: Continuously improve our services and increase satisfaction among our diverse clients.
A number of initiatives have been implemented in Local Courts across the State during the year to improve services for current and potential clients. As part of this process, Local Courts conducted their second State-wide client survey. This provided baseline client satisfaction data and highlighted priority areas for client service improvements to be incorporated into business planning and the development of client service projects.
Overall satisfaction ratings showed a “good” outcome (options were poor, acceptable, good and very good), with higher rankings for those areas related to staff performance such as the quality of service and assistance from staff. Results confirm the need to focus future efforts on areas such as signage, court safety and security, facilities at court (particularly for clients with special needs such as parents of young children and people with a disability) and the quality and availability of information to assist people to understand court process and procedures.
The survey format and methodology was changed between 1998 and 1999 in order to develop a generic survey format which will be used by all court jurisdictions. This means that it is difficult to make direct comparisons between the two years. The results do not seem significantly different, although the level of client satisfaction appears to be slighter higher in 1999.
The majority of medium-large Local Courts also now run Court User forums which involve other agencies and individuals in examining ways that court operations and interagency processes and procedures can be streamlined to provide more efficient and effective services. Court User Forums also provide a venue where specific issues such as improved court safety and security or court support to vulnerable clients can be discussed and service improvement strategies developed. Many court buildings are heritage listed which places restrictions on, or significantly increases the cost of renovation or refurbishment of these old buildings. Given this, courts need to adopt a creative and consultative approach to solving some of the physical barriers which impact on user’s satisfaction with the court environment.
There has been a further expansion in outreach services provided by Local Courts. These involve a regular timetable of visits by Court staff to isolated or remote communities or to venues other than the court. These services are designed to meet the needs of clients who face barriers in directly accessing the local court.
Barriers can include poor or no public transport, mobility problems resulting from age, disability or financial disadvantage, or psychological or emotional barriers to attending a court house. For example, many people from diverse cultural backgrounds, including Aboriginal people and refugees may be uncomfortable about attending court as a result of past experiences or negative perceptions. These clients are more likely to access the services they require if they are available in a more neutral environment, particularly where they can also have the support of workers from their own communities. Local Courts staff use community health centres, neighbourhood centres, Aboriginal Land Councils, Women’s Centres and local government facilities, as well as direct visits to institutions and residential establishments.
State wide Audits of all courts were conducted last year to identify the physical barriers for people with a disability who need to access the Local Court. A number of Local Courts are now participating in a Flexible Service Delivery project to trial a range of service delivery initiatives to ensure that our services are more accessible and responsive to the needs of clients with a physical, intellectual or psychiatric disability.
The Client Service Training Program has continued into its second year and has been well received by staff. This program focuses on communication skills, conflict resolution and effective complaint management. Evaluations have indicated that staff who have attended believe they have a greater capacity to deal with the often complex interactions which can occur in courts. Staff have also reported that the program has helped them to more clearly define areas of service delivery where they would benefit from additional information and skills development. As a result, many Local Courts staff have accessed a range of specialist client service training, focusing on areas such as cross cultural communication, working in teams, and strategies for improving service delivery to Aboriginal communities and clients with an intellectual disability.
Domestic Violence standards have been written and will be implemented this year following a state wide training program for staff. The standards are designed to ensure that victims of violence are aware of their rights and the services available at Local Courts to assist them in obtaining appropriate protection and support services. Guidelines have been written to assist staff in providing responsive and appropriate services. Local Courts consulted extensively with domestic violence service providers and client advocates in the development of the Domestic Violence Standards and Guidelines. This process has helped to clarify roles and responsibilities and promoted a collaborative approach to service improvement.
Local Courts have conducted a number of pilots during the year to expand the use of telephone services to access legal information and assistance from a Chamber Magistrate or other court staff. The trials were conducted at a number of high volume courts in the metropolitan area. Following the success of the trials, telephone access will be expanded to all courts where there is a significant demand for Chamber Magistrate services. This should reduce waiting times and improve services for clients still needing to attend in person (for example domestic violence complainants), and it is also expected to improve access for residents in remote and isolated areas.
A number of working parties have been formed to implement the recommendations from the Chamber Review conducted last year. One of these teams will build on the success of the telephone Chamber Service by examining strategies which will improve intake, assessment and appointment processes so as to manage demand more effectively in metropolitan areas. Another group is developing client service standards for Chamber services to ensure the public is aware of the type, extent and quality of services which they can expect. Another team is looking at mechanisms which will formalise and enhance the level of professional support to staff in rural areas. The objective for all three groups is to enhance the quality of Local Courts service delivery to the community.
Local Courts and the District Court collaborated on a trial project to identify the best model for integrating Local and District Court registries. The project aim is to provide a more co-ordinated and efficient service to the public, and to provide staff with enhanced career development and career satisfaction opportunities. Following the trial of different models at a number of locations a preferred model has been identified and will be progressively implemented across registries.
THE YEAR AHEAD
The key priorities for Local Courts for the coming year are to:
· convene a peak stakeholders groups to examine priority service delivery and communication issues;
· work with key stakeholders and staff to develop a Court Charter which will clarify the rights of court users;
· develop consultation, communication and client service improvement strategies to be further incorporated in all Regional and Local Action Plans to ensure that service delivery is responsive to local needs and reflects community resources;
· conduct state wide interagency workshops about the new Domestic Violence Standards to ensure that staff have the skills and knowledge to effectively work with other agencies to implement these standards;
· continue to work at the corporate, regional and local levels to develop more effective partnerships with the Magistracy;
· develop strategic alliances with key agencies and business centres to improve the integration and effectiveness of work processes and service delivery; and
· provide management development training on flexible service delivery to enhance the ability of supervisory and management staff to implement or support their staff to implement new client service initiatives.
SUPREME COURT
Goal: Promote the earliest, most effective and efficient resolution of criminal matters and civil disputes.
On 31 January 2000, the Chief Justice announced time standards for completion of criminal trials, and civil and criminal appeals, as part of a package of reforms to ensure that litigation is conducted as efficiently and expeditiously as possible.
The first reports of performance against these standards will be for the calendar year 2000. The Chief Justice has noted that these standards can only be attained by co-operation between the legal profession and the judiciary, and that measurement of performance against these standards measures the delivery of justice, not just by the Court, but by all those associated, separately but inter-dependently, with the process of litigation. The Registry’s contribution will be to provide administration support the Court to allow it to provide just, quick and cheap resolution of cases for litigants and the community, and to measure outcomes.
Time standards for civil cases will be announced when the Court’s computer-based case management systems are enhanced to provide the required monitoring and measurement for the thousands of civil cases filed each year. The Department is providing ongoing assistance to the Court in the technical development of the required systems for this work.
This year, median waiting times for criminal trials have been reduced for cases where the accused is in custody and have reduced for cases where the accused in on bail. For cases in the court of Criminal Appeals, there has also been a reduction in the time from when parties are ready to proceed until hearing. This is despite an increase in lodgements.
The Court has previously reported on waiting times for civil cases to be heard once case management is completed. The significant improvements made over the last 2 years for civil cases have been maintained and apply to all matters, regardless of the length or complexity of the case. For all cases, once ready to proceed to hearing, the time taken for a hearing date to be allocated is less than two months.
Waiting times for cases in the Equity Division vary according to the type of case and length of hearing, but have generally improved over the last year. As at June 2000, waiting times for general Equity matters prepared for hearing was between nine and 10 months, compared with 12 and 14 months at June 1999.
There have been continued improvements in the waiting times for cases in the Court of Appeal. Delays for standard appeals was 14 months as at June 2000. For shorter appeals the delay was six months and for long appeals the delay was 17 months.
The Registry will assist the judiciary with strategic planning to improve waiting times in all areas of the Supreme Court in the coming year.
The Court and its Registry continue to promote the use of court-annexed mediation, as well as providing external facilities for mediation and early neutral evaluation. The promotion of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) forms a routine part of case management that aims to assist litigants to achieve earlier resolution of their dispute, with greater flexibility in outcomes and at less cost than a fully litigated court case. ADR is incorporated into case management options, especially for suitable equity, commercial, professional negligence, possession and contentious probate cases. Six of the Court’s Registrars are trained in mediation techniques. The use of arbitration was extended to equity proceedings during the year through legislation so that suitable matters can take advantage of this faster and cheaper form of dispute resolution.
Goal: Continuously improve our services and increase satisfaction among our diverse clients.
Over 19,000 probate applications were lodged with the Court this year. Grants were generally made within two days of receipt and fully prepared and posted within a further four days. This high level of service compares very favourably with similar jurisdictions in Australia and overseas and has been maintained for 11 years. This work involving wills and estates is the most common form of interaction between the general community and the Supreme Court.
The Registry surveyed people attending the Court during July 1999 to establish the needs of its clients and to help determine priorities for improvement programs for Registry services and Court facilities. The results of the survey will serve as a benchmark against which the results of future surveys can be compared. While the 1999 survey showed a reasonable level of public satisfaction with services and facilities, it also identified information leaflets, promotion of language services and provision of facilities for babies, parents and small children as the main areas for improvement. The survey also revealed significant support among Registry users for electronic Registry services and a later closing time.
The first step towards establishing a Registry Users’ Group were taken this year to enable consultation with and participation of internal and external clients to assist in strategic planning of Registry services. Nominations have been sought from and provided by the professional associations whose members comprise the majority of Registry users for membership of the Registry Users Group.
A Technology in the Courtroom Project was launched during the year. This pilot project implements commercially available technologies in a courtroom environment. These include video link facilities, computerised document management, in-court Internet access and transcript production via remote monitoring of proceedings (in conjunction with Reporting Services Branch). The pilot is expected to continue into 2001-02 following an evaluation report.
THE YEAR AHEAD
The key priorities of the Supreme Court for the coming year are to:
· complete the Supreme Court Registry staff re-structure and establish performance plans that are linked to the Registry’s Business Plan;
· progress the development of computerised management reporting systems and subsequent determination of time standards for civil cases;
· progress development of policies and strategies for introduction of electronic document lodgement;
· implement the Registry communication plan; and
· complete the Registry refurbishment.
__________________________________ | Previous Page | Back to Annual Report Table of Contents | Back to LawLink NSW | Top of Page | Webmaster | Feedback | |