Justice for the Community

Transcription

1 Magistrates Court of Victoria Justice for the Community Annual Report

2 Contents Letter to the Governor Report of the Chief Magistrate 1 Highlights of the Year 4 Year at a Glance 5 Overview of the Magistrates Court of Victoria 6 Chief Executive Officer s Message 9 Objectives and Achievements 11 Governance and Judicial Administration 14 Court Administration 18 Criminal Jurisdiction 23 To His Excellency The Honourable John Landy, AC, MBE Governor of the State of Victoria Dear Governor On Behalf of the Council of Magistrates, I am pleased to present the Annual Report covering the operation of the Magistrates Court of Victoria from 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005 in accordance with Section 15 of the Magistrates Court Act of Victoria Sincerely Civil Jurisdiction 29 Family Law Jurisdiction 38 Crimes Family Violence Jurisdiction 39 Family Violence Court Division 41 WorkCover Jurisdiction 43 The Municipal Electoral Tribunal 44 Ian L Gray Chief Magistrate 25 November 2005 Koori Court 45 Drug Court 47 State Coroner s Office of Victoria 50 Court Support Services 52 Community Engagement 61 Serving the Court s Users 64 Financial Statements 66 Directory of the Magistracy of Victoria 68 Court Locations 69 Building Maintenance and Construction 71 Web Site Information 72 Map of Hearing Locations inside back cover About Our Cover Theme The Magistrates Court of Victoria is a (centre) Project Manager Courts and Court of Justice for all Victorians. Programs Development Daniel Briggs One of the Court s continuing themes is and Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul justice for the community. This report Grant; (bottom) Court staff members details a wide range of initiatives and Lew Gonsalves, Adrian McGirr, Julian actions undertaken by the Court having Macleod, Sarah Hurle, Melanie Quinn, a clear focus on the community. Adam Meyer and Freida Vilella. Front cover, from left (top) Back cover, from left A bike ride for Magistrates Gregory Levine, Jennifer charity, an information day for the Bowles, Catherine Lamble, Ian Gray Sudanese Community at the Ringwood (Chief Magistrate), Felicity Broughton, Court and Onsidesoccer. Refer to page William Gibb and Barbara Cotterell; 61 for more information.

3 Report of the Chief Magistrate It is often said, and worth repeating, that approximately 90% of people who appear before a court in Victoria, appear in a Magistrate s Court. The public s experience of criminal and civil justice in this Court plays a key role in influencing public confidence in the administration of justice, and the Magistrates Court takes seriously the responsibility it has to reinforce that confidence. In the Court experienced a positive year marked by an improved budget, increased jurisdictions, a number of important State Government funded initiatives and continuing change and modernisation within the Court. Government Initiatives The State Government has introduced a number of important initiatives in the areas of family violence, the age change jurisdiction in the Children s Court, the new Court Interventions Program and the Neighbourhood Justice Centre, to name just a few. These Governmentfunded initiatives will bring benefits to the Court, including more magisterial capacity, more registrars and other resources targeted to particular locations. Increased Budget The Court s operating budget increased during the year under review, and the resources flowing from that budget will bring positive benefits to the Court. See pages for budget information. New Jurisdictions The Court implemented the increase in the civil jurisdiction of the Court, operative from 1 January As I reported last year, the Court has welcomed this increase in jurisdiction, and I believe that we will be able to demonstrate that the Court can discharge this additional responsibility efficiently and at a very high standard. The Family Violence Court Division opened at Heidelberg and Ballarat as a result of legislation passed in Early indications from each Court are that the Division is working successfully. A more detailed report will appear in next year s Annual Report. Court Performance By reference to the output measurement data the Court continued to perform well and generally met or exceeded all performance and budget targets. The number of criminal cases initiated totalled 134,270, representing a 2.9% decrease, compared with 138,280 cases in The number of civil complaints issued or filed in totalled 78,444, representing a 10.2% increase, compared with 71,165 issued or filed in Koori Court Evaluated One of the outstanding success stories for the Court has been the Koori Court, which has operated since October 2002 when it opened at Shepparton, then later at Broadmeadows and Warrnambool in and more recently at Mildura. The Final Evaluation Report, presented in December 2004 by La Trobe University, assessed the Koori Court s first two years of operation as a pilot project. A highly positive report, it demonstrates reduced recidivism and a reduced rate of non-appearance by Aboriginal offenders at court. In addition, it shows that Aboriginal Elders sitting with Magistrates works very well. The Attorney-General has expressed an intention to introduce the Koori Court to the Children s Court in Melbourne and to Gippsland by the end of The Court welcomes this initiative, although we plan to engage Government in a discussion about the pace of these changes and the likely resource implications, which must be carefully managed. Chief Magistrate Ian L Gray. While initiatives such as the Koori Court, Drug Court and to a lesser degree, the Family Violence Court Division embrace a problem-solving approach and a high quality of justice, nonetheless resource implications are critical. The evaluation of the Koori Court has identified, amongst other things, that specialised courts such as the Koori Court require a far slower processing time per case. Magistrates spend the day determining fewer cases than in a conventional court list. As I, and others, have said before, although this is slower justice, it is better justice and the kind of justice for which the community should be prepared to pay. On behalf of the Court I have strongly supported the development of specialist divisions, like the Koori Court, and Specialist Lists. At the same time the Court has put Government on notice that these developments can, and often do, have a flowon effect on the efficiency of the Court as a whole, and bring with them a need for increased resourcing. I should not leave this part of the report without referring again to the excellent and pioneering work done by Dr Kate Auty as the original Koori Court magistrate in Shepparton. Additionally I wish Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 1

4 Report of the Chief Magistrate to pay tribute to the work done by Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul Grant who, at the time of writing, has been the Supervising Magistrate for the Koori Court since Kate Auty s departure in July Paul s work has included an emphasis on professional development, coordination and keeping a weather eye on the resourcing implications of the division. Above all he and the other magistrates who regularly sit in the Division have successfully promoted the benefits of the Koori Court s specialist approach and inspired many other magistrates to express interest in, and undergo professional development for, this area of the Court s work. Judicial Registrars As a result of the Court s proposal to Government to create the position of Judicial Registrar, the Magistrates Court (Judicial Registrars and Court Rules) Act 2005 was passed in April This is a very important development for the Court. The position will create further efficiencies within the Court and will enable magistrates to concentrate on the higher end of their various jurisdictions, while allocating some of their work to highly trained and qualified judicial registrars. We expect two appointments before the end of New Publications At the Council of Magistrates meeting in July 2005, the new Bench Book and a number of other publications were launched. The Bench Book is a major piece of work and a tribute to the many magistrates who worked on it in conjunction with the Judicial College of Victoria. The Court has committed funds for regular updating of this and the other practice manuals, which have been recently launched or re-launched. In addition the Court has developed an Induction Manual that centralises all the information newly-appointed magistrates need to know about the operation of the Court, and includes the Guide to Judicial Conduct. It was also my pleasure to launch the Coroner s Manual and an update of the Bail Digest prepared by Deputy Chief Magistrate Jelena Popovic. Criminal Law Reform On 20 October 2004 Magistrates Jennifer Bowles and Lisa Hannan gave evidence before the Victorian Parliamentary Law Reform Committee of Inquiry into Warrant Powers and Procedures. Judicial Education The Court s magistrates enjoyed another good year of professional development. Again, I wish to acknowledge the productive relationship between the Court, in particular the Professional Development Committee chaired by Jillian Crowe, and the Judicial College of Victoria. Magistrates continued to actively participate in the work of the Judicial College as they attended various programs, seminars and activities. The Judgment Writing Course put on by the College was a great success, as was the Magistrates Intensive. I was delighted to host Justice Michael Kirby who gave a speech on the work of the High Court in the nature of an occasional address to magistrates, judges and legal practitioners at the Court in March I hope to make a practice of the Court hosting similar events in the future. Peer Assistant Exchange Project During the reporting year magistrates participated in an exchange of magistrates program between South Australia and Victoria. The Judicial College of Victoria supported the program, which was designed to provide magistrates with an opportunity to gain greater insight into their role and function. I look forward to continuing this program in some form in the future. Law Week and Open Day During the Court again played an active role during Law Week. The highlight was the Open Day when hundreds of members of the public enjoyed access to the Court. Magistrate Clive Alsop conducted a You Be The Judge session in his characteristically entertaining way, and other magistrates and registrars informed the public about the work of the Court. Mentoring and Training The Court has developed a Student Placement Programme whereby Magistrates mentor law students. I acknowledge the initiative and the work done by Magistrate Reg Marron in this area. Magistrates also make significant contributions to the training of police prosecutors in particular Deputy Chief Magistrate Dan Muling has been a regular contributor in this field. Community Benefits The Court s connection with the community is critical to many of its operations. For example, the Criminal Justice Diversion Program diverts first-time offenders from the trial process and directs them to undertake various conditions that benefit the community, as well as the offender and victims. The scheme has continued to garner the support of magistrates and delivers both labour and a large financial contribution to the local community. The Court s Regional Coordinating Magistrates continued to maintain a high level of local engagement. They represent the Court at the local level in many ways. Many of these activities remain unsung but they should be acknowledged here. 2 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

5 Much of the local work done by magistrates, often supported by registrars, is educational in nature involving not only school groups but particular ethnic minorities in the community seeking knowledge about the way the justice system works. These contributions enhance the reputation of the Court and, I believe, the justice system generally. Appointments and Retirements The following magistrates were appointed during the financial year: Jennifer Grubissa on 31 August Audrey Jamieson on 21 December Kay Robertson on 9 February Charles Rozencwajg on 7 December Brian Wright on 31 August Richard Wright on 21 December Those that retired were: Colin MacLeod on 16 July 2004; and John Myers on 7 January Both Colin and John made their own unique contribution to the work of the Court over many years, and I thank them on behalf of the community. Future Projects In response to the recommendations of the Victorian Law Reform Commission, work began to establish a specialist Sex Offences List in the Court, led by Magistrate Lisa Hannan. Together with the County Court, the Magistrates Court is committed to the development of the list, which is planned to be established early in However, like similar projects, the list will not be able to be launched successfully, nor be sustained without appropriate resourcing, and the Court has alerted Government to this requirement. An interesting initiative of the Attorney- General, the Neighbourhood Justice Centre will provide a communitymanaged centre with a very high level of community knowledge and interaction. Inspired by the New York model, the project aims to replicate, at least in part, the American experience. The Court will provide a magistrate to form part of the centre, which will be based in Collingwood. The project represents another innovative way of tackling the question of crime and offending in the local community. The centre will enable a magistrate or judge to deal with cases having an immediate local impact and the local offending can be dealt with immediately. What s in a Name? The Attorney-General has indicated support for a change of name from Magistrate to Judge. This change is strongly supported by Victorian magistrates. There has also been discussion about a name change for the Court itself. Victorian magistrates have expressed mixed views about the most appropriate name for the Court, with strong support for Local Court and Regional Court and some preference for maintaining the status quo. Acknowledgments I wish to thank the Court s Magistrates for their work throughout the year both in Court and in the many extracurricular roles they perform. I also thank the Deputy Chief Magistrates and Supervising Magistrates for their invaluable support and their contribution to the administration of the Court. Additionally, I wish to acknowledge Chief Executive Officer Mick Francis and his staff and the Court s registrars for their untiring efforts in supporting Magistrates across Victoria. I also wish to thank Lisa Farrell for her wonderful contribution as my personal assistant. She left the Court in June 2005 and I congratulate her on her new appointment. I appreciate the great job done by Helen Falkingham in taking over the role as my new personal assistant. I take this opportunity to thank the volunteer organisations, Court Network and the Salvation Army Court and Prison Services, both of whom provide excellent support and service to the Court and Court users. I acknowledge the assistance and support provided by the Secretary of the Department of Justice Penny Armytage and the Executive Director, Courts, John Griffin. John s support for the Court has been consistent and effective, and I attribute the recent budget success to the work of John and his staff in collaboration with our Chief Executive Officer Mick Francis and his staff. A number of magistrates also made major contributions to this effort. As I said in last year s Annual Report, without any compromising of judicial independence, it is necessary to have an effective and productive collaboration with Government if the Court is to successfully implement a number of recently developed initiatives. Many of these projects bring about the need to harmonise increasing specialisation with the generalist skill and capacity that is required of all magistrates and registrars. Achieving this harmonisation will be one of the major challenges of the year ahead. Ian L Gray Chief Magistrate Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 3

6 Highlights of the Year Refer to Page The Court secured additional funding and successfully managed a number of major trials arising from high profile gangland murders, and investigations by the Purana and CEJA taskforces and Victoria Police Ethical Standards investigations. The Clerk of Courts qualification was modernised with the commencement in March 2005 of the inaugural Certificate IV in Government (Court Services) course at Victoria University. As part of the Attorney-General s Justice Statement, the Court successfully implemented an increased civil jurisdiction to $100,000 in January Two new multi-jurisdictional regional court complexes were opened in Mildura on 23 November 2004 and Warrnambool on 10 February 2005, providing staff and Court users with modern, state-of-the-art facilities. The Family Violence Court Division was developed and pilots commenced on schedule at Ballarat and Heidelberg Courts in June Magistrates worked on the production of a new Bench Book, a Coroner s Handbook, an updated VOCAT Handbook and other key tools for judicial use. All publications will be available on the Judicial Officer Information Network (JOIN). Successfully piloted digital audio recording at Melbourne Magistrates Court. Rolled out XP to every court location improving access for regional and suburban courts across the State. Recognised and rewarded 165 staff from across the Court through the Magistrates Court Reward and Recognition Program. The Criminal Justice Diversion Program resulted in more than $770,000 in donations being made to charitable organisations and approximately 10,000 hours of volunteer work being performed. Successfully merged the Bail Support and CREDIT programs to provide improved services and an improved operating platform for the CREDIT program. The lengthy industrial dispute in relation to the Clerk of Courts Category Review was resolved on 24 May 2005, effectively bringing to a conclusion a dispute, which had been ongoing since 2003, and enabling the Court to move toward implementing a more effective organisational structure with improved career opportunities for staff A new intake of Trainee Court Registrars commenced the Certificate IV in Government (Court Services) course with a three-day orientation program. Trainees received information about the course and what will be expected of them over the next two years. 4 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

7 Year at a Glance Item % Change All Criminal Prosecutions: Initiated, comprising: No 134, ,280 (2.9) Arrest and summons cases No 114, ,923 (7.1) PERIN Court revocations No 20,048 15, Finalised No 130, ,890 (0.2) Pending No 26,471 27,518 (3.8) Criminal cases finalised within six months % (1.6) Criminal cases pending for more than 12 months % Cases finalised at Contest Mention Court No 8,579 9,082 (5.5) Committal proceedings finalised No 3,423 3, Persons committed for trial to a higher court No 2,717 2, Defendants summarily dealt with by the Court (from the committal stream) No Applications received by After Hours Service No 2,251 1, Cases finalised at ex parte hearings No 7,457 7, Warrants issued (includes search and arrest) No 20,704 20,799 (0.5) Appeals lodged against conviction or sentence No 2,133 2,167 (1.6) PERIN Court infringements initiated No 697, ,061 (9.2) All Civil Cases: Complaints issued or filed No 78,444 71, Defended claims finalised, comprising: No 9,360 9,499 (1.5) Pre-hearing conference No 3,687 3,897 (5.4) Hearings No 3,185 3,212 (0.8) Arbitrations No 2,488 2, Defended claims pending No 3,407 3,710 (8.2) Defended claims finalised within six months % (0.1) Defended claims pending for more than 12 months % (0.9) Defence notices filed (including WorkCover): Up to $10,000 claimed No 6,761 7,226 (6.4) More than $10,000 claimed No 3,234 3,503 (7.7) Default orders made No 40,542 38, Family Law orders made No 2,709 3,229 (16.1) Crimes Family Violence complaints issued No 24,060 20, WorkCover complaints issued No 1,174 1,233 (4.8) Drug Court orders made No Coronial investigations initiated No 4,620 4, Case Profile Criminal No Cases Initiated Cases Finalised Case Profile Civil No % Complaints Issued or Filed % Defended Claims Finalised Cases Pending Defended Claims Pending As the two graphs above illustrate, the Court experienced a decrease in criminal cases initiated and an increase in civil complaints issued or filed. Operating Expenditure Five-Year Financial Summary 1.0% 4.9% 6.5% 52.2% Item ($ 000) Special Appropriations 49,578 51,707 40,287 46,223 32,532 Salaries 16,777 14,785 15,149 15,293 14,250 Operating 6,185 6,235 6,684 6,012 4,979 Revenue Retention 950 1,024 1,987 2,115 1,705 Parallel Programs 4,628 3,003 2, Minor Capital Works Department Controlled Expenditure 16,815 14,823 16,888 16,642 15,656 Note: prior to budget figures included the Children s Court. 17.7% Special Appropriations Salaries Operating Revenue Retention Parallel Programs Minor Capital Works Department Controlled Expenditure The majority of the Court s expenditure related to special appropriations including VOCAT compensation payments. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 5

8 Overview of the Magistrates Court of Victoria The Court s Jurisdiction The Magistrates Court of Victoria (the Court) is established under section 4 of the Magistrates Court Act 1989 (the Act). The Court comprises 101 Magistrates and nine Acting Magistrates who are supported by 429 full-time equivalent registrars and support staff, including staff working in the Coroner s Court, Children s Court and the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal. The Court s Magistrates sit at 54 locations in metropolitan, suburban and country areas. The Court exercises a varied, substantial and extensive jurisdiction as follows. Criminal Jurisdiction In addition to the Act, the criminal jurisdiction of the Court derives from various State and Federal Acts, including the Crimes Act 1958 (State) and Crimes Act 1914 (Commonwealth), the Sentencing Act 1991 and the Judiciary Act The Court has jurisdiction to determine summary offences and a wide range of indictable offences. Section 53(1) and Schedule 4 of the Act empower the Court to hear indictable offences, such as: causing injury intentionally or recklessly; conduct endangering persons; indecent assault; robbery/theft; burglary/aggravated burglary; obtaining property by deception; and destroying or damaging property. The Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine certain indictable offences where the amount or value of the property alleged to have been stolen, destroyed or damaged does not exceed $25,000. Where the Court does not have jurisdiction to deal with indictable offences summarily, the Court conducts committal proceedings to determine if there is sufficient evidence for the accused to be committed to stand trial at either the County Court or Supreme Court. The Civil Jurisdiction The civil jurisdiction of the Court is provided for in Part 5 of the Act and comprises a General Division and an Arbitration Division. The Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine claims up to $100,000, including claims for personal injury damages. In addition, the Court has jurisdiction to hear claims for equitable relief, such as applications for injunctions or for the return of property, or to prevent disposal or dissipation of assets. Family Law Jurisdiction The Court has jurisdiction to deal with matters under the Family Law Act 1975 and the Crimes (Family Violence) Act WorkCover Jurisdiction The Court deals with a number of proceedings under the Accident Compensation Act 1985 (as amended). The Court s jurisdiction in WorkCover matters extends to claims of up to $40,000. Industrial Jurisdiction The Industrial Division of the Court deals with disputes between employees and employers over the entitlements of employees arising under a contract of employment, an award, a certified agreement, Australian Workplace Agreements, the Workplace Relations Act 1996, the Long Service Leave Act 1993, the Public Holidays Act 1993 or the Outworkers (Improved Protection) Act 2003 a mix of Commonwealth and State legislation. 6 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

9 After Hours Service The Court provides the services of a Magistrate and Registrar between the hours of 5.00 p.m. and 8.45 a.m. on weekdays and 24 hours on weekends and public holidays. The Duty Magistrate considers applications for search warrants and the Registrar considers applications for warrants to arrest for criminal offences and also warrants to arrest for the purpose of the Crimes (Family Violence) Act. An application for an urgent Interim Intervention Order pursuant to the Crimes (Family Violence) Act may also be made to the Magistrate. Court Support Services The Court develops and participates in a number of initiatives designed to improve the Court s responsiveness to the community. The purpose of these initiatives is to bridge gaps of understanding and communication between the Court, other courts, the Government, Court users and the general public. The Court provides a number of important programs, which are detailed on pages Disability Coordinator The Court provides a Disability Coordinator to assist persons with a disability who come before the Court. Community Forensic Mental Health Court Liaison Service Four experienced registered psychiatric nurses identify and assess persons attending court who may require psychiatric intervention. Credit/Bail Support Program The Court Referral and Evaluation for Drug Treatment Program (CREDIT)/ Bail Support Program targets defendants arrested for non-violent offences who have a demonstrable drug problem and are at risk of committing further offences while on bail. The program aims to enhance the likelihood of a defendant being granted bail and successfully completing the bail period by providing appropriate links and referrals to Court and community-based support systems by way of Court-based case management accommodation, supervision and access to treatment programs. Juvenile Justice Court Advice Unit The Juvenile Justice Court Advice Unit advises the Court about young persons charged with committing offences and provides suitability assessments for courts making Youth Detention Orders. Aboriginal Liaison Officer The Aboriginal Liaison Officer provides advice and access to services for indigenous offenders who come before the Court. Criminal Justice Diversion Program The Criminal Justice Diversion Program diverts minor offenders from the trial process. The program is available at all major metropolitan courts. Enforcement Review Program The Enforcement Review Program is aimed at individuals who have incurred a variety of multiple infringements registered at the PERIN Court that are progressing to warrant stage. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 7

10 Overview of the Magistrates Court of Victoria Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal Established under the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 (VOCAT Act), the Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (VOCAT) not only provides financial assistance to help victims of crime recover from their ordeals but also acknowledges the suffering they have experienced. In a symbolic way, VOCAT represents the Victorian community s expression of sympathy and condolence to victims and their families. All Magistrates are members of VOCAT. Specially trained registrars assist victims with their applications and develop strong links within their local communities to support victims of crime. Refer to the VOCAT Annual Report for details of its proceedings, amounts of awards made and case statistics. Children s Court All Magistrates sit in the Children s Court in locations across Victoria, including a dedicated Children s Court in Melbourne. For more information, refer to the Children s Court Annual Report. State Coroner s Office Established under the Coroners Act 1985, the State Coroner s Office comprises the State Coroner, Deputy State Coroner, coroners, registrars, counsellors, researchers and other Court support staff. Magistrates, who are also coroners, and registrars deal with coronial matters that occur in rural Victoria. Coroners investigate reportable deaths and fires and hear inquests. In addition, coroners make recommendations regarding public health and safety to assist in reducing the incidence of preventable death and injury within the community. registrars perform important quasi-judicial functions and, together with other Court staff, are responsible for non-judicial operations and providing administrative support to coroners. Refer to the State Coroner s Office of Victoria report on page 50 for more information. 8 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

11 Chief Executive Officer s Message I am pleased to present this year s Annual Report, my second as CEO. The year has been enormously challenging and in some respects one of the most successful the Court has enjoyed for some time. I take this opportunity to reflect briefly on some of the highlights of , which are presented in more detail in the body of this Annual Report, and to acknowledge some of the people who have been significant in leading the Court so capably during the period. Operations Operationally it has been a busy and efficient period for the Court. Performance data confirms that the Court has managed its workload efficiently and that the case load management practices and strategies the Court employed continued to be effective in ensuring cases are dealt with efficiently. Operational highlights included: 130,680 criminal matters finalised; 24,232 intervention orders finalised; 5,342 VOCAT matters finalised; and 9,360 defended civil claims finalised. The Court successfully implemented an increased civil jurisdiction to $100,000 and the Diversion program operated at 12% above required targets for the year. During the financial year the Diversion program resulted in more than $770,000 in donations, and 10,000 hours of volunteer work being performed. Additionally the Bail Support and CREDIT programs were successfully merged to provide improved services and an improved operating platform for the CREDIT program. The Family Violence Court Division (FVCD) was developed and pilots commenced on schedule at Ballarat and Heidelberg Courts and high profile proceedings arising from CEJA/Purana/ ESD investigations were managed in a way that did credit to the Court as a whole. These matters involved a huge amount of consultation and cooperation between agencies. Excellent relationships were built between the Court and the various involved agencies and a high level of cooperation achieved. As a result, cases were dealt with expediently and without any major security incident affecting the hearings. The Attorney-General formally opened multi-jurisdictional court complexes at Mildura and Warrnambool, which commenced operations during the financial year. Before the official opening of these facilities, Mildura and Warrnambool residents took the opportunity for a sneak preview at Community Open Days. Visitors were treated to free guided tours and a rare opportunity to look behind the scenes in areas not usually open to the public at their local courts. Certificate IV in Government (Court Services) On 7 March 2005 the first group of 26 students commenced the inaugural Certificate IV Court Administrators Qualification course at Victoria University. This nationally-accredited course replaces a mandatory training Chief Executive Officer Mick Francis. program for clerks of courts/registrars that has been in place since It is a significant step in ensuring that training and professional development for registrars is truly reflective of the complex role performed by modern day court administrators. My congratulations go to those trainees who are undertaking the inaugural course and, in particular, to His Honour Justice Kellam for his guidance in bringing Certificate IV to fruition. Clerks of Court Category Review After 18 months of disputation the Clerks of Court Category Review was finalised when on 24 May 2005 Commissioner Smith handed down his decision regarding translation issues arising from his previous Category Review Order. Many people at all levels of the organisation feel passionately about this issue. It is the passion and commitment people in this job have about what they do that has made the past year, whilst difficult, one of the most successful ones in the Court s recent history. Resolution Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 9

12 Chief Executive Officer s Message of this dispute and implementation of the outcomes of the Category Review provide a solid platform for ongoing structural and organisational reform of the Court s administration. Financial Management In the 2005 State Budget, the Court received the biggest injection of funds that this organisation has had in many years. For the Court managed its operations within budget and achieved a recurrent budget surplus of $275,502. Acknowledgments During I visited every court and again was enormously impressed by the calibre of the Court s people. In my view, the personal and professional values of our people are this organisation s best asset. Challenges, such as those brought about by the influx of major criminal committals during the reporting period, provided the Court with opportunities to demonstrate leadership, initiative and vision. It is clear from the Court s performance data that our people have met these challenges in a superb manner. The success the Court has enjoyed over the past financial year is a tribute to the Magistrates and staff who are prepared to work hard, show initiative, look for solutions to problems and develop new ways of doing things. I extend my thanks and congratulations to everyone for their contributions over the past 12 months. I am grateful to the Court s leadership team who have collectively and individually demonstrated great ability and commitment and in whom I have every confidence. My congratulations go to Operations Manager Peter McCann, Manager, Family Violence Division Samantha Adrichem, Manager, Court Support and Diversion Simone Shields, State Training Manager Mark McCutchan, Finance Manager Victor Yovanche and Technology Coordinator Hans Wolf, each of whom has made a significant contribution during I thank Chief Magistrate Ian Gray for his leadership throughout the year and also the Deputy Chief Magistrates for their continuing support. I am grateful to John Griffin, Executive Director, Courts for his support and guidance and his colleagues, in particular Roy Kriegler, Noel Moloney and Geoffrey Davine who have provided great assistance to the Court. Lastly, I take this opportunity to thank my personal staff Cate Ryan, Kaye Johnston, Maree Laskaris and Leah Hickey, each of whom has continued to provide me with consistently outstanding effort and assistance throughout the reporting year. Future Focus During the next financial year the Court will realign its regional boundaries with the Department s Regional Network Model and all courts will enjoy a bandwidth upgrade which, when complete, will mean that every court in the State will have the same network performance as Melbourne. A number of key justice initiatives have been funded in this year s State Budget and the Court will play an important role in projects, including the Court Intervention Program at Melbourne, Sunshine and Moe, the Gateways to Justice Initiative, extension of the Koori Court, establishment of the Neighbourhood Justice Centre and further development of the ICMS project. The results of the 2004 Employee Attitude Survey highlighted a number of areas where there is still much work to be done to improve the workplace. However those results also showed that we continue to progress in making the Court an excellent place to work. I am confident will be a full and challenging one for the Court. Mick Francis Chief Executive Officer 10 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

13 Objectives and Achievements in Key Strategies Achievements Monitor, evaluate and implement changes to listing practices to ensure that criminal and civil case management minimises delay, waste and expense. Generally met or exceeded all performance and budget targets. Successfully implemented increased civil jurisdiction to $100,000 as part of the Attorney-General s Justice Statement. Secured additional funding and successfully managed major trials proceedings, resulting from high-profile gangland murders and investigations by the Purana/ CEJA task forces and Victoria Police Ethical Standards Division. As at 30 June 2005, 308 Magistrates sitting days had been dedicated to these proceedings, which were conducted without security incident. All parties have agreed that the Court s management and coordination of these proceedings has been very effective. Completed a comprehensive review of its Civil Procedure Rules. Developed a complex fraud list to better manage these large and often timeconsuming cases. Entrenched the special street sex worker list at the Melbourne Magistrates Court and continued to support the list with improved case management. Streamline processes in order to improve access to the court system and explore opportunities to better coordinate work between jurisdictions. Operated the Criminal Justice Diversion Program at 12% above required targets for the financial year. Successfully piloted digital audio recording at the Melbourne Magistrates Court. Consult and engage widely to identify and develop case management and process improvements. Continued to develop data collection processes and performance measures as the foundation for evidence-based decision-making in relation to case load management and support future funding bids. Conducted Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (VOCAT) and Crimes Family Violence (CFV) audits to ensure data accuracy. Investigate technology to support innovative approaches to case management. The Court s Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) service processed more than half of court documents, continuing an upward trend. Participated in the development of an Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS) as a model for customer web-based access, case management processing, information sharing and a state-wide integrated electronic registry. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 11

14 Objectives and Achievements in Key Strategies Achievements Integrate existing therapeutic and restorative approaches into mainstream Court operations. Successfully merged the Bail Support and CREDIT programs to provide a more effective and efficient program, which achieved agreed performance targets. In consultation with specific groups develop strategies and programs to ensure the Court is accessible and responsive to disadvantaged or marginalised groups and individuals. Assisted marginalised and disadvantaged groups through the Criminal Justice Diversion Program, resulting in more than $770,000 in donations and 10,000 hours of volunteer work being performed. Established local advisory groups to advise Family Violence Court Division (FVCD) development at Ballarat and Heidelberg. These Groups will have an ongoing role. Developed FVCD and commenced pilots at Ballarat and Heidelberg in June Review the Safety and Security Master Plan 2003 to ensure courts provide a safe and secure environment for staff and users. Monitored the efficacy of the Safety and Security Master Plan and collected data, as well as distributed Court security information such as the location of all duress alarms in all courts, and prepared and placed on the Resource Centre and Bulletin Board important contact numbers for easy access by all staff. Installed duress alarms at all courts. Refreshed security equipment at Melbourne as part of upgrades for major trials. Promote and where appropriate expand use of technologies including video conferencing and audiovisual and tele-conferencing technology and Internet based technology to improve access to justice and court services. Extended the Digital Audio Recording pilot program simultaneously with the XP rollout, providing the opportunity to enhance the audio recording system. The system will be rolled out to the Melbourne Court in July XP was rolled out to every court location, improving access for regional and suburban court staff across the State. Provide appropriate accommodation for all Court users and court support agencies in existing and future court facilities. Upgraded the Court s facilities at Melbourne to provide improved accommodation for staff and Court users. Two new multi-jurisdictional regional court complexes were opened in Mildura on 23 November 2004 and Warrnambool on 10 February 2005, providing staff and Court users with state-of-the-art facilities. Work commenced on two new court complexes at Moorabbin and in the Latrobe Valley. 12 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

15 Key Strategies Achievements Develop a more inclusive planning framework across the Court as a foundation for building skills, knowledge and commitment to integrated planning across courts, tribunals and relevant justice agencies. A total of 233 staff attended a Registrars Conference as a forum for staff engagement in problem solving and to undertake sessions specifically to develop strategies to address the key issues raised by the DOJ Staff Survey. Develop the skills of staff, and develop and enhance leadership skills and potential across the Court through appropriate training and development programs. Certificate IV in Government (Court Services), a nationally-accredited universitybased court administrators course commenced in March 2005, providing an integrated training and recruitment program for the Court s registrars. Developed and implemented an induction program for new Magistrates. Provided performance management training to all senior registrars. Magistrates underwent specialised training in relation to the Family Violence Court Division and the Koori Court. Support an active rewards and recognition program to encourage and reward initiative and excellence. Recognised and rewarded 165 staff from across the Court through the Magistrates Court of Victoria Rewards and Recognition Program. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 13

16 Governance and Judicial Administration Establishment of the Court Organisational Structure as at 30 June 2005 The Magistrates Court of Victoria (the Court) is established under the provisions of the Magistrates Court Act 1989 (the Act). The Court is constituted by its Magistrates and Registrars. Pursuant to section 15(3) of the Act, Magistrates must report annually to the Governor on the operation of the Court. The Chief Magistrate assigns duties and makes the necessary arrangements for Magistrates to attend Courts throughout Victoria, as required. Structure and Operation The Chief Magistrate is the head of the Court and its Senior Judicial Officer. The Chief Magistrate is responsible for: assigning duties for Magistrates; Chief Executive Officer M Francis Operations Manager P McCann Principal Registrars, Senior Registrars and Registrars Other Court Staff (including Coordinators) Chief Magistrate I L Gray Regional Coordinating Magistrates A J Bolger B J Coburn J M Crowe J W Doherty J P Dugdale W P Gibb R K A Kumar K H Macpherson L I Martin C A Stewart-Thornton I M von Einem Deputy Chief Magistrates D J Muling J Popovic P D Grant P H Lauritsen P A Smith State Coordinating Magistrate P A Smith Supervising Magistrates P H Lauritsen DCM (Civil) L A Hannan (Criminal) J A B Goldsbrough (Crimes Family Violence) S M Wakeling (VOCAT) D J Muling DCM (IT) P D Grant DCM (Koori Court) Magistrates (see list page 68) budget expenditure in consultation with the Chief Executive Officer; calling and chairing meetings of the Council of Magistrates; making Rules of Court in consultation with Deputy Chief Magistrates; issuing practice directions; and performing statutory functions. The Court s Structure and Operations document sets out the direction of the Court and specifies the roles of the Deputy Chief Magistrates, the Coordinating Magistrates, Supervising Magistrates, Senior Registrars and Coordinating Registrars. The plan identifies locations and boundaries of the various regions and allocates the Regional Coordinating Magistrates and Magistrates to regions. In relation to administration, an Organisational Chart sets out the structural hierarchy of the Court and defines the positions of Chief Executive Officer, Senior Registrar and Registrar (see above). Council of Magistrates A Council of the Magistrates (excluding acting Magistrates) must meet at least once in each year on a day or days fixed by the Chief Magistrate to: consider the operation of the Magistrates Court Act and the Rules; consider the working of the officers of the Court and the arrangements relating to the duties of Court officials; and inquire into and examine any defects that appear to exist in the system of procedure or administration of the law in the Court. During , the Council of Magistrates met on 30 July 2004, 26 November 2004 and 18 March Executive Committee In 2001, the Council of Magistrates adopted new governance arrangements and created an annually-elected Executive Committee. Members meet monthly, deal with matters of policy and report to the Council of Magistrates. During , committee members met on the first Friday of each month. Jurisdictional Committees The Court has established committees for each jurisdiction, including Criminal, Civil, VOCAT and Crimes Family Violence. A Supervising Magistrate heads each committee and reports to the Chief Magistrate about the work of their respective committee. Minutes of all committee meetings are circulated to all Magistrates. Refer to page 16 for further details regarding committee activities. 14 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

17 Governance Protocols The Governance protocol adopted in July 2001 sets out the roles of Regional Coordinating Magistrates and Supervising Magistrates as follows: Regional Coordinating Magistrates A. There is to be a Regional Coordinating Magistrate in each region appointed by the Chief Magistrate for a term of three years. Such appointments to be made after calling for expressions of interest and following any policy protocols determined by Council. B. Ordinarily a Regional Coordinating Magistrate shall not be eligible for re-appointment after two consecutive terms. C. The Regional Coordinating Magistrate of each region shall be located at the headquarters court of the region. D. The role of a Regional Coordinating Magistrate is to: (i) Ensure that there are sufficient Magistrates to hear cases listed and in consultation with the Coordinating Registrar, allocate Magistrates to hear the cases. The actual allocation of Magistrates to cases must remain within the discretion of the Regional Coordinating Magistrate. (ii) Supervise the disposition of cases listed in the region in accordance with protocols issued by the Chief Magistrate. (iii) Report to the Chief Magistrate on a regular basis on the operation of the region and report in writing to the Chief Magistrate Executive Committee Members, from left Gregory Levine, Jennifer Bowles, Catherine Lamble, Ian Gray CM, Felicity Broughton, William Gibb and Barbara Cotterell. on behalf of the Region by 30 June each year to assist in the preparation of the Annual Report. (iv) Attend meetings, at least quarterly, with the Chief Magistrate and others to: identify initiatives and strategies to promote uniformity of procedures across regions; make recommendations to the Chief Magistrate and/or the Council; and develop plans for the implementation of Council policy. (v) Consult with the Senior Registrar of the region to ensure the implementation of policies developed by the Council. (vi) Consult and liaise with the Senior Registrar about the administration of the region. (vii) Encourage and promote an effective and harmonious working relationship with Magistrates. (viii) Represent the view of Magistrates in the region. (ix) Liaise with other jurisdictions including Coroner s Court, Children s Court and Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal, on the regional operation of those jurisdictions. (x) Ensure that there is a Duty Magistrate available within the region between the hours of 9.00 a.m. and 5.00 p.m. each working week day. (xi) Liaise with community agencies within the region and convene regular meetings of Court user groups. (xii) Other duties as may be determined by the Council. Supervising Magistrates A. There shall be Supervising Magistrates appointed by the Chief Magistrate for a term of three years Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 15

18 Governance and Judicial Administration for different areas of responsibility of the Court viz: Criminal Law. Civil Law/WorkCover. Family Law/Crimes Family Violence. VOCAT. Such other area of responsibility as Council determines. Such appointments to be made after calling for expressions of interest and following any policy protocols determined by Council. B. The role of a Supervising Magistrate shall be to: A group of Magistrates during a break on a professional development day. (i) liaise between the Registry and the Magistrates; (ii) encourage consistent practice across the regions; (iii) liaise with the community; (iv) advise the Chief Magistrate; (v) consult with Magistrates; (vi) disseminate information about legislative and procedural changes in the jurisdiction; (vii) develop listing protocols, rules, practice directions, and other documents; (viii) ensure Courtlink is providing adequate service to the jurisdiction; (ix) report in writing to the Chief Magistrate by 30 June each year upon their area of responsibility to assist in the preparation of the Annual Report; and (x) such other duties as the Council may determine from time to time. Internal Committees There is a very active committee structure within the Court. Magistrates give their time to extracurricular, committee work consistently over the year. Professional Development Committee The Professional Development Committee meets at least once a month, engages in detailed planning and preparation for professional development conferences (three per year) and assists the Chief Magistrate in maintaining both a flow of information and regular opportunity for Magistrates to participate in professional development activities both within Victoria and interstate. During , Committee members included Jillian Crowe (Chair), Ian Gray CM, Sue Blashki, Jennifer Bowles, Christine Stewart-Thornton, Caitlin English, Jane Patrick, Ian McGrane, Jacinta Heffey, Peter Lauritsen DCM, Jelena Popovic DCM and Denise O Reilly. The Committee arranged regular conferences held on 29 July 2004, 25 November 2004 and 17 March 2005 and produced programs using the expertise, knowledge and skills of Magistrates and invited experts to communicate information to the body of Magistrates, with the invaluable assistance of the Judicial College of Victoria (JCV) staff. In addition to the regular conferences, Magistrates participated in the following activities: Magistrates Intensive, including orientation, induction and refresher training. Magistrates Exchange Program with the South Australian magistracy. Peter Lauritsen represented the Court representative on the Judicial College Syllabus Advisory Committee. 16 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

19 IT Committee The Court s IT Committee is an active and productive sponsor of continuous improvement to the Courtlink computer system and the provision of an increasingly comprehensive body of information delivered electronically through the Internet and the intranet. During , Committee members included Dan Muling DCM (Chair), Peter Power, Richard Wright, Reg Marron, Nunzio La Rosa, Hans Wolf, Ross Capuana, Bob Newton and Karen King. The Committee undertook the following projects: Windows XP rollout. Registering Judgements. Digital Audio Recording. Voice recognition software. Bandwidth upgrade. Civil Rules Committee The Civil Rules Committee comprises Magistrates, Deputy Magistrates, Deputy Registrars and members of each arm of the legal profession. A member of the Office of the Chief Parliamentary Counsel assists the Committee. During , Committee members included Peter Lauritsen DCM (Chair) Barry Braun, Franz Holzer, Mark Pentilla, Mark Vendy, Robert White, Brian Wright, Chris Gilligan, Neil Williams QC and Ian McEachern. The Committee met on a number of occasions and examined various issues including: judgment by confession; offers of compromise and an arbitration for a small claim; and pre-hearing conferences and telephone attendances. Criminal Law Committee During , members of the Criminal Law Committee included Lisa Hannan (Chair), Barbara Cotterell, Dan Muling DCM, Paul Grant DCM, Donna Bakos, Nunzio La Rosa, Jillian Crowe, Reg Marron, Jeanette Maughan, John Hardy, Jane Patrick, Andrew Capell, Charlie Rozencwajg, Jelena Popovich DCM and Jennifer Grubissa. The Committee met every six weeks and considered various issues including: powers to be delegated to judicial registrars; amendments to confiscation recovery orders; Community Based Orders and cumulation of hours; Bail Orders and the inclusion of conditions allowing 24 hours notice regarding change of address; and Complex Fraud List practice directions. Occupational Health and Safety Committee During , the members of the Occupational Health and Safety Committee included Graeme Johnstone (Chair), Paul Grant DCM, Frank Jones, Ross Betts, Greg Levine, Heather Spooner, Noreen Toohey, Charlie Rozencwajg, Brian Wright, Mick Francis and Pieter Brook-Rerecich (Department of Justice). The Committee regularly met during the period and considered issues including ergonomic assessment of courtroom and chamber furniture. In addition the Committee oversaw production of a comprehensive Magistrates Occupational Health and Safety Manual. VOCAT Coordinating Committee During , the members of the VOCAT Coordinating Committee included Felicity Broughton (Chair), Sue Wakeling (Chair), Dan Muling DCM, Duncan Reynolds, Jane Patrick, Audrey Jamieson, Anthony Gwynne, Diana Petrolo, Tom Barrett and Jan Dundon. The Committee regularly met to consider issues including: exercise of registrars powers; entering of VOCAT orders on Courtlink; complexities associated with online completion of documents; recovery of award from offenders; and guidelines for psychologists counselling and report fees and for solicitors expenses. Refer to the VOCAT Annual Report for further details. Terms and Conditions Committee During , members of the Terms and Conditions Committee included Kim Parkinson (Chair), Audrey Jamieson, Greg Levine, John Hardy and Louis Hill. The Committee prepares submissions to the Judicial Remuneration Tribunal (JRT) and liaises with the Tribunal on all issues relating to salaries, allowances and general terms and conditions of employment of judicial officers. The JRT has embarked on a comprehensive review of terms and conditions of Victorian judicial officers and the Committee is actively engaging with that review process. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 17

20 Court Administration Registry staff members, from left Lew Gonsalves, Adrian McGirr, Julian Macleod, Sarah Hurle, Melanie Quinn, Adam Meyer and Freida Vilella. The Court s Registry The Court s Registry plays a vital role in the efficient administration and processing of the vast workload of the Court. The Registry provides its services in the most efficient and cost-effective manner possible. Registrars have the duties, powers and functions provided by the Act, the Regulations and the Rules, including: issuing process; administering oaths; extending bail; issuing warrants to arrest; endorsing certain licences and certificates; determining certain types of applications; conducting pre-hearing conferences in civil cases and making appropriate orders; scheduling cases for hearing; providing procedural advice regarding court processes; and receiving and disbursing money paid as a result of Court Orders. Section 17 of the Act provides for the appointment of a Principal Registrar and as many registrars and deputy registrars as are necessary. The Principal Registrar oversees the administration and management of the Court s records and orders and issues practice directions to all Court staff regarding changes to or the introduction of new administrative practices and procedures. Senior registrars manage the administration of a particular region. There are 12 regions within Victoria and a region may consist of one or many outside courts. Registrars are appointed to outside courts within a region, which mainly applies to country regions, and are responsible for staff and the operations of particular courts. They report to the Senior Registrar for the region. Qualified and Trainee Court Registrars perform in-court work of prioritising and calling cases, recording proceedings, administering oaths, initiating process and documenting the production of exhibits. Victoria is the only State that requires formal training and the completion of qualifying examinations to perform duties as a Court Registrar, with some States beginning to introduce similar systems. Registrars and support staff work at 54 court locations throughout the State. Additionally Court Registrars are located in the Children s, Coroner s, County and Supreme Courts, as well as at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). 18 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

21 Registry staff members, from left Tobias Griffin, Julian Macleod, Joanne Chieu, Anthony Patti, Claire Eldridge, Sarah Damouny and Jason Morks. Court Administration As at 30 June 2005, the number of fulltime equivalent employees totalled , compared with on 30 June While this result appears to be a significant decrease in staff numbers it includes only operative staff as full-time equivalent employees. The figure published in the Annual Report included operative and inoperative staff. In addition, the method used for recording casual EFTs has been amended to more accurately reflect the actual hours worked by casual employees. Employee Wages Non-judicial employee wages totalled $13.9 million in , compared with $12.2 million in The increase in total wages was due to: creation of a new Koori Court Officer position at Mildura; amalgamation of Bail Support/ CREDIT programs resulting in an increase in the number of CREDIT/ Bail Support workers; employment of two Applicant Workers and two Defendant Workers in the Family Violence Division at Ballarat and Heidelberg; payment of arrears in relation to the Clerks of Court Category Review; and ongoing progression payments linked to performance management. New Career Structure Under the Victorian Public Service (VPS) career structure for non-executive employees, positions are classified within a VPS Grade from one to six or Senior Technical Specialist Grade based on work value. The Victorian Public Service Agreement will remain in force until 1 July On 1 October 2004 a salary and allowances increase of 3% was paid to staff as part of the VPS Agreement, which provides a series of salary increases. Clerks of Court Structure The Clerks of Court Category Review was determined on 17 February 2005 and 24 May The determination aligns the Clerks of Court structure with the VPS structure and the value ranges, setting the salary bands for registry staff based on the type, size, jurisdiction, level of responsibility for specific functions and court location. Career Structure and Work Organisation Review The Career Structure and Work Organisation Review enables the Department of Justice (DOJ) to enhance the way it manages staff performance and progression. The new program was broadened to include: performance in the job; professionalism; experience and efficiency in the role; and learning and development. These four elements were combined to create a basis for individual progression through a seven-grade structure with defined progression steps or payments. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 19

22 Court Administration Partnership Award recipients for , from left Anna Worrall, Kylie Pieters, Camilla Nooy, Ian Griffiths, Edward Dolceamore, John Griffin and Siobhan Ebert. Performance Management and Progression System The DOJ Performance Management and Progression System is designed to: clearly link the achievement of Individual Performance Management and Progression Plans to the success of the overall business plan; provide tangible guidance to staff on the conduct and values that are important to exhibit when undertaking their duties; and enable a comprehensive learning and development strategy supporting current and future job and career needs. Equal Employment Opportunity The Court is an equal employment opportunity employer. The Court s recruitment and selection process is underlined by a commitment to select the best applicants based on merit and equity principles. Staff members are provided with regular information and opportunities to attend seminars and workshops relating to issues such as harassment and discrimination in the workplace. Occupational Health and Safety The Court aims to provide and maintain a safe working environment that ensures the health and wellbeing of Court staff, Magistrates and visitors to the Court. During , we reviewed and tested emergency and evacuation procedures and building security on a regular basis. We accepted three WorkCover claims during the financial year (four in ), resulting in 48 work days lost, compared with 61 work days lost from claims in Occupational Health and Safety Committee The Occupational Health and Safety (OH&S) Committee comprised 15 members who met every two months to discuss and implement health and safety measures. The Committee achieved the following initiatives during : Involved in rectification of white ant problem at Shepparton Court and ongoing monitoring. Ongoing testing and tagging of portable electrical appliances throughout the State. Only Western District, Coroner s Court, PERIN Court and part of Melbourne remain to be completed as at 30 June This activity should be completed by the end of Provided OH&S reports to courts as part of testing and tagging of electrical appliances. Involved in safety improvements at various court locations. Conducted regular audit and inspection to improve risk prevention and compliance with OH&S requirements. Ongoing consultation with regard to providing suitable ladders in court locations to prevent injury from falls. Began preparing mouse pads containing emergency procedure 20 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

23 As a team building exercise, the Court held a Court of Origin football match. Court staff organised the event, which was a fiercely contested, on-field match between the Melbourne Magistrates Court and The Rest (city, suburban and country courts). The match was held at the Whitten Oval where The Rest team emerged victorious with a 38-point lead. The Court plans to hold Showdown II in information to be distributed to all Court staff. Arranged an ergonomist to visit court locations to provide advice about suitable chairs for Magistrates and guidance with correct posture. Training and Development The Training and Development Unit recruits Trainee Court Registrars. In addition, the Unit develops and presents training programs for Court staff. These programs ensure staff members receive appropriate and relevant training in a number of areas. Refer to the table on page 22 for training courses conducted. During , 47 Trainee Court Registrars were appointed, compared with 45 in Thirty-four Trainee Court Registrars were promoted to Qualified Court Registrars, compared with 21 in Certificate IV in Government (Court Services) The Department of Justice introduced a standardised qualification for Court Registrars to address inconsistencies in recruitment standards, training approaches, and competency levels of registry staff within and across Victorian jurisdictions. To achieve this aim, the Magistrates Court, County Court, Supreme Court and VCAT, in conjunction with Victoria University and the Clerk of Courts Group, developed a nationally-accredited Certificate IV traineeship in Government (Court Services). The course was designed to develop the skills and competencies essential to fulfil the functions of a Court Registrar. This course will expand the career paths for staff, not only within the Victorian justice system, but also within Government statutory bodies at Commonwealth, State and local levels and the private sector. On 7 March 2005, 26 Trainee Court Registrars officially commenced their Certificate IV in Government (Court Services) course with a week-long induction and orientation program. The Honourable Justice Kellam officially opened the program and spoke to trainees about the development of the course. In addition, Executive Director, Courts, John Griffin welcomed the students to the first Australian training and education program for Court staff. In the Court plans to enroll an additional 50 Trainee Court Registrars to undertake the course. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 21

24 Court Administration Bail Justice Accreditation To effectively provide a more just, responsive and accessible legal system, the Court appointed a number of Bail Justices during Court Registrars and Magistrates conducted four Bail Justice Accreditation Courses attended by 36 individuals, compared with nine courses attended by 174 individuals in Bail Justices perform an important voluntary role in the community. They hear applications for bail under the Bail Act 1977 and applications for Interim Accommodation Orders for children under the Children and Young Persons Act Staff Rewards and Recognition The Magistrates Court Rewards and Recognition Program recognises staff achievements at a local level. During the program made 165 awards to staff (98 in ) for their efforts in the following areas: Customer Service Excellence. Improvements and Ideas. Team Awards. Workplace Harmony. The Quiet Achiever. Community Spirit. Training Courses Conducted Course Description Number of Participants Induction Program Gives new Trainee Court 22 Registrars an overall picture of how the Court operates. Client Service Course Covers topics such as dealing with 31 difficult clients, letter writing, communication and telephone techniques. Interview Skills Designed for staff applying for positions 23 within the VPS, particularly Court positions. Topics included writing an application and the interview process. Managing a Potentially Presented to Court staff from all 47 Violent Client jurisdictions to help address the ongoing issue of Court security. Bail Justice Delivered to volunteers from the 36 Accreditation Course community and Court Registrars to be appointed as Bail Justices. Corporate Training The Department of Justice provides a 78 Program Corporate Training Program that is attending accessible to all Court staff. The 24 courses program offers competency-based training, self-management programs and cultural awareness programs. Staff Numbers and Composition by Victorian Public Service (VPS) Grade to VPS Grade: Women Men Total Women Men Total VPS Grade VPS Grade VPS Grade VPS Grade VPS Grade VPS Grade Sessionals Total Partnership Awards The Department of Justice Partnership Awards Program recognises individuals and teams who make a valuable contribution in their day-to-day work or with regard to a special initiative they have helped to develop. Staff were recognised in the following categories: Customer Service. Team Award. Community Spirit. Crossing the Boundaries. People Management. Ideas and Improvement. In , 15 Court staff received Partnership Awards, compared with 38 staff in and 22 in Staff Numbers by Gender Women Men 22 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

25 Criminal Jurisdiction Criminal Jurisdiction at a Glance Objective Finalise 85.0% of criminal cases within six months of the defendant s first appearance in Court. Results Cases initiated fell by 2.9%, totalling 134,270 cases. Arrest and summons cases initiated fell by 7.1%, totalling 114,222. PERIN Court revocations initiated rose by 30.5%, totalling 20,048. Cases finalised at Contest Mention Court fell by 5.5%, totalling 8,579. Committal proceedings finalised rose by 7.0%, totalling 3,423. Finalised 87.7% of criminal cases within six months of the defendant s first appearance in Court. Cases pending fell by 3.9%, totalling 26,471. Future Finalise 85.0% of criminal cases within six months of the defendant s first appearance in Court. During the year under review, the Court exercised jurisdiction in relation to a wide range of both summary offences and indictable offences triable summarily. The Court determines criminal cases in a timely and cost-efficient way and seeks to exercise summary jurisdiction where appropriate. Such an approach requires active case management and increased workload for the Court but is consistent with the objectives set out in the Attorney-General s Justice Statement. The Court heard and determined a range of summary offences initiated by a variety of agencies, including Victoria Police, the Australian Federal Police, the Australian Securities and Investment Commission, the Australian Tax Office, city councils, Citylink and other statutory bodies. Cases Initiated In , cases initiated totalled 134,270, representing a 2.9% decrease, compared with 138,280 cases in Arrest and summons cases initiated totalled 114,222, representing a 7.1% decrease, compared with 122,923 in PERIN Court revocations initiated in totalled 20,048, representing a 30.5% increase, compared with 15,357 cases in Cases Initiated by Type of Lodgement The breakdown of cases initiated by type of lodgement include: 85.1% Arrest or Summons (88.9% in ); and 14.9% Revocation of Infringement Notices (11.1% in ). Cases Finalised The number of cases finalised totalled 130,680, compared with 130,890 in , representing a 0.2% decrease. The Court finalised 87.7% of criminal cases within six months of the defendant s first appearance in Court (89.1% in ). Contest Mention System A Contest Mention is a hearing conducted before a matter proceeds to a contested hearing. Contest Mention hearings involve all parties and a Magistrate, and aim to determine whether a case can be resolved by finding common ground between the parties. The Contest Mention System operates throughout Victoria and results in significant savings in Court resources by identifying matters that can be determined other than by way of contested hearing. Where matters do proceed to a contested hearing, the Contest Mention System assists by identifying and refining issues. During the Court at Ringwood implemented local changes to the Contest Mention system to address issues including excessive adjournments for the purpose of case negotiations and delays in contest mention listings. This initiative was developed after consultation between the Court, police prosecutors, Legal Aid and other legal practitioners. At Ringwood police informants are no longer required to attend Contest Mention hearings unless there is a specific reason for their attendance. Prosecutors have full authority to negotiate on behalf of informants and so with the preparation that prosecutors do prior to a Contest Mention court, all discussions have then taken place prior to the day of hearing. A pilot of this system proved to be successful and the system Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 23

26 Criminal Jurisdiction has been maintained on an ongoing basis. Listing delays have been reduced considerably since the introduction of these arrangements and resolution rates have increased. The Court will investigate the feasibility of introducing a version of this system initially at Melbourne and then on a Statewide basis. During , cases finalised at Contest Mention Court totalled 8,579, compared with 9,082 in , representing an decrease of 5.5%. These cases represented 7.5% of all arrest and summons cases commenced (7.4% in ). Committal Proceedings Committal proceedings are a significant component of the Court s workload, and in recent years the Court has actively managed these matters by implementing a number of approaches to ensure Committals are dealt with expeditiously. During the Court conducted a committal offensive at Melbourne to reduce the delay for the listing of contested committals (eight months in ). This approach was effective in halving the committal listing delay, and as at 30 June 2005 the delay for listing contested committals was 14 weeks. Another offensive is scheduled for later in The Court has implemented other measures to manage committal proceedings as follows. Committal Case Conferences Committal case conferences are listed at the request of parties or on direction of the Court. The primary aim of case conferences, which are conducted at 9.15 a.m. each morning, is to identify matters that can be resolved and to narrow the issues in dispute where a matter is to proceed as a contested Criminal Case Activity No Cases Initiated Cases Finalised Cases Pending Case statistics for have remained relatively stable compared with recent years. Types of Criminal Cases Arrest or Summons Cases 14.9% Revocation of Infringement Notices How We Handle Criminal Matters 85.1% Summons/Arrest List for Hearing The vast majority of cases initiated involved arrest or summons cases. Mention Hearing Age of Pending Cases in Months Contest Mention % Guilty Plea Not Guilty/Contested Guilty Plea Not Guilty Plea Coordinator Sets Hearing Date/Diary Coordinator Sets Hearing Date/Diary Hearing Hearing Court Order 0 0<3 3< <9 9<12 12< < Enforcement Of cases pending as at 30 June 2005, 87.7% had been pending for less than six months. 24 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

27 Most Common Charges Heard Description No. % Theft 40, Obtain property by deception 18, Drunk in a public place 12, Drive whilst disqualified 11, Unlawful assault 9, Drive at speed over speed limit 9, Drive whilst exceeding PCA 9, Possess drug of dependence 8, Exceed PCA within three hours of breath test 8, Fail to answer bail 8, Burglary 7, Intentionally/recklessly cause injury 7, Handle/receive/dispose of stolen goods 7, Use unregistered motor vehicle on highway 6, Careless driving 6, Assault/resist police/person assisting police 6, Criminal damage 6, Drive vehicle unregistered in toll zone 5, Unlicensed driving 5, Breach intervention order 5, Use drug of dependence 4, Attempt to commit indictable offence 4, Deal property suspected being proceeds of crime 3, Assault in company/by kicking/with weapon etc 3, Obtain financial advantage by deception 3, Go equipped to steal/cheat 3, Refuse/fail to furnish return 2, Traffic Drug of Dependence 2, Learner drive without experienced driver 2, Drive in manner dangerous 2, Bring money/proceeds to Vic proceeds of crime 2, Drive without L plates displayed 2, Make false document to prejudice another 2, Fraudulently alter registration label/plates etc 1, Behave indecent/offensive manner in public place 1, False Accounting 1, Use indecent/obscene language public place 1, Failure to comply with a no stopping sign 1, Possess/carry/use regulated/controlled weapon 1, Make threat to kill 1, Park for longer than indicated 1, Cultivate Narcotic Plant 1, LOCAL LAW OFFENCE 1, Indecent Act with child under 16 1, Fail to pay parking fee 1, State false name 1, Unlawfully on premises/precinct 1, Wilfully injure/damage property 1, Fail to give name/address to owner/injured 1, Use false document to prejudice other 1, Total 352, committal. Preliminary indications show that this is an effective means of bringing about early resolution and savings in hearing time. Child Sexual Offences List In January 2005 the second Child Sexual Offences List was conducted at Melbourne. The aim of this specialist list is to prioritise cases involving child sexual offence complainants. Listing in this way has been found to enhance the Court s management of these cases, and importantly it helps reduce the trauma associated with court appearances for complainants. Another such list is planned for Street Workers List The Street Workers List operates at Melbourne on the first Tuesday of each month. It aims to increase the rate of attendance of street workers at court so that support services can be engaged to reduce the rate of offending. Complex Fraud Management List Another specialist list, the Complex Fraud Management List operates every second Thursday at Melbourne and aims to increase early case management of complex fraud matters. Identified cases are listed before a designated complex fraud list Magistrate at the earliest opportunity and preliminary indications show that this approach is resulting in increased resolution rates. Committal Stream Statistics Cases finalised in the committal stream during totalled 3,423, compared with 3,198 in The number of defendants finalised in the committal stream comprised 2.6% of the total number of defendants finalised in the Court (less than 2.4% in ). The number of defendants committed to a higher court in increased by 5.6%, totalling 2,717, compared with 2,571 in The number of defendants summarily dealt with in the Court increased by 1.0% from 627 (19.6%) in to 706 (20.7%) in Major Trials Over the past 12 months the Court has successfully managed an influx of cases resulting from organised and major crime. During the Court received additional funding to manage the influx of committal matters, resulting from the Ethical Standards Division investigations and the CEJA/Purana taskforces. The funding, which commenced on 1 July 2004 enabled the Court to efficiently deal with the anticipated hump in the legal system that these prosecutions would create. Additional resources were provided to ensure priority listing of these cases and to enable the Court to deal effectively with issues, including issuing and processing highly confidential and sensitive search warrants, increased security risks at the Court while the major trial cases were in progress, witness security, witnesses giving evidence via video link and the use of technology in the Court. The Court created the Major Trial Coordinator position commencing in December The Coordinator was responsible for overall management of these matters and for data collection and modelling, a role which will be ongoing to ensure that each of the Court s programs are collecting and effectively using data. During there were 111 major trial cases dealt with and finalised in both the summary and committal stream, representing 308 days of Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 25

28 Criminal Jurisdiction Magistrates sitting time (not including chamber time). After each of these committals, all parties involved, including the Victorian Government Reporting Service (VGRS), Protective Services, informants and defence participated in an evaluation to assess the process and to provide feedback. Feedback received from all parties and agencies has been excellent. Cases Pending Cases pending measures the elapsed time between the date case details were first entered into Courtlink and 30 June each year. On 30 June 2005 cases pending totalled 26,471, a decrease of 3.9%, compared with 27,518 cases pending on 30 June Cases pending for more than six months represented 17.6% (17.4% in ) and cases pending for more than 12 months represented 4.7% (4.5% in ). Most Common Charges Heard In , of the 352,437 charges heard, the offence of theft was the most common charge, totalling 40,020. This result represents 11.4% of all cases heard, compared with when the offence of theft was the most common charge, totalling 43,161 and representing 12.3% of all cases heard. The second most common charge heard was obtaining property by deception (18,556 charges or 5.3% of total charges heard). This result compares with when obtaining property by deception was the second most common charge heard, totalling 20,436 and representing 5.8% of total charges heard. The Court heard 9,084 charges of drink-driving (9,249 in ) and dealt with 12,751 charges of persons being drunk in a public place (12,222 in ). The table on page 25 shows the 50 most common charges finalised in the Court during , excluding charges that were struck out or committed to a higher court. The 25 most common offences heard totalled 265,679 or 75.4%, compared with 223,586 offences heard or 63.9% in All other charges dealt with by the Court totalled 86,758 or 24.6% (126,330 or 36.1% in ). Note that these numbers do not reflect allocation of resources or actual hearing time. Application Types The Court has the power to hear and determine more than 980 different types of applications. While some applications are relatively straightforward, the Court has experienced substantial increases in applications that require resources in terms of hearing time. Applications pursuant to section 464 of the Crimes Act continue to occupy substantial court time as do applications for restoration of drivers licence. In addition, recent provisions under the Road Safety Act 1986, including the interlock provisions, have placed increased demand on resource allocation, as have the Melbourne CityLink Act 1995 with regard to applications for extension of objection time. Bail applications occupy a significant portion of the Court s workload and increases in bail applications, both at first instance and involving change of facts and circumstances, create delays in criminal hearings. Bail applications in serious matters where defendants face an exceptional circumstances test can occupy multiple hearing days. Applications where defendants face a show cause test also require significant hearing time. Cases Finalised at Contest Mention Court No. % Cases Finalised Proportion of Cases Commenced The number of matters finalised decreased by 5.5% in , totalling 8,579, compared with 9,082 in Defendants Finalised in Committal Stream No Committed to Higher Court Summarily Dealt With The number of defendants committed to a higher court and summarily dealt with rose by 5.6% and 1.0% respectively. 26 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

29 After Hours Service Search Warrants Issued by Type Infringements Initiated and Referred to Open Court No. % % 10.2% 4.1% 12.8% Drugs 20.5% Evidence (Crimes Act s465) Stolen Goods Firearms Other Infringements Initiated Ratio of Open Court Matters 28.0% 22.6% Children and Young Persons Act Commonwealth Crimes/Customs The majority of search warrants involved evidence under s465 of the Crimes Act, matters under the Children and Young Persons Act, drugs and stolen goods. Major Applications Finalised by Outcome % Granted 14.1% Refused 79.7% Struck Out The Court granted most of the major applications finalised during Infringements initiated decreased by 9.2% with appeals against the PERIN Registrar s refusal to revoke initiated in open court representing only 0.9% of infringements initiated During the major types of applications finalised included: 8,268 to restore driver licence (8,707 in ); 1,751 to reduce report time between assessments (2,770 in ); 1,100 re-hearing (1,501 in ); 138 for permission to drive pending re-hearing (130 in ); 997 for removal of interlock condition from drivers licence (n/a in ) 1,585 to a Magistrate for bail (1,444 in ); 1,215 to a Magistrate to vary bail (1,254 in ); 1,371 for forensic procedure (1,534 in ); 859 to question/investigate a person in custody (917 in ); 281 to retain fingerprints/forensic evidence (283 in ); and 163 to be deemed a non-prohibited person (172 in ). Ex Parte Hearings Ex parte hearings occur when a defendant fails to appear. During , cases finalised at ex parte hearings totalled 7,457, representing a 2.9% increase compared with 7,242 in The number of cases finalised at ex parte hearings represented 6.5% of the total number of summons and arrest cases commenced, compared with 5.9% in Warrants The Court has power to issue search warrants and other warrants, including warrants to arrest, under various Acts of Parliament, including: section 92 of the Crimes Act (stolen goods); section 465 of the Crimes Act (evidence); section 81 of the Drugs, Poisons and Controlled Substances Act 1981 (drugs); and section 46 of the Firearms Act 1996 (firearms). In , Magistrates issued 20,704 warrants to arrest, compared with 20,799 in the previous financial year. There were 9,893 search warrants issued compared with 10,627 in Appeals A party may appeal to the County Court with respect to a conviction and/or sentence imposed by the Magistrates Court. As at 30 June 2005, appeals lodged against conviction or sentence totalled 2,133, representing a 1.6% decrease, compared with 2,167 as at 30 June About 1.6% of finalised cases result in an appeal being lodged. After Hours Service During , the Court continued to provide an After Hours Service. A Magistrate and Registrar are available for urgent matters between 5.00 p.m. and 8.45 a.m. on weekdays and 24 hours a day on weekends and public holidays. The service responds to applications that originate from both State and Federal agencies. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 27

30 Criminal Jurisdiction The After Hours Service draws on Registrars staff resources from the 24- hour Initial Investigations Office attached to the State Coroner s Office and On-Call Registrars of the Court. A Registrar is available to assist the Magistrate and, where necessary, to consider applications for issuing warrants to arrest for the purposes of the Crimes (Family Violence) Act Overall the After Hours Service responded to 46% more requests than in ,928 compared with 4,743. During , the After Hours Service received 2,251 applications for search warrants, compared with 1,937 in , representing a 16.2% increase. The types of search warrants comprised: 631 to search for evidence of an indictable offence pursuant to section 465 of Crimes Act 1958 (598 in ); 508 Children and Young Persons Act 1989 (345 in ); 461 drugs (453 in ); 289 stolen goods (292 in ); 93 Commonwealth crimes and customs (53 in ); 39 firearms (61 in ); and 230 other enquiries or applications not included above (135 in ). The service received 4,677 applications for warrants to arrest for the purposes of applications for Intervention Orders pursuant to the Crimes (Family Violence) Act and Sec 21A of the Crimes Act (Stalking Provisions), compared with 2,817 in a 66% increase. PERIN Court The PERIN Court (Penalty Enforcement by Registration of Infringement Notice) makes enforcement orders for payment and recovery of large numbers of unpaid fines (infringements) without the need for these matters to be dealt with by a Magistrate in open court. Infringement notices contain fixed penalties and involve parking, driving, public transport, and animal and litter offences issued by more than 100 different enforcement agencies. Where a person has had an enforcement order made against them they may apply to the PERIN Court for the order to be revoked or seek extra time to pay his or her fine. During , the number of infringements initiated totalled 697,364, compared with 768,061 cases in , representing a 9.2% decrease. This amount comprises 481,746 Government infringements (TCO and Citylink), down from 517,079 in , representing a 6.9% decrease and 215,618 Non- Government infringements (Local Councils), down from 251,081 in , representing a 14.2% decrease. These decreases are due to the continuation of the freeze on fixed camera sites on the Western Ring Road, together with signposting to fixed speed/red light intersections, resulting in fewer infringements than anticipated. Also Local Councils used debt collection agencies as an alternative to registering with PERIN, which has contributed to a decreased number of local Government infringements lodged. Where the PERIN Registrar refuses to grant revocation of an infringement, the defendant may appeal against the refusal to a Magistrate in open court. If a Magistrate refuses the revocation application, the charge remains the responsibility of the PERIN Court. If a Magistrate grants the revocation application, the charge is dealt with in open court. In , PERIN revocations totalled 20,048, including those revoked under Clause 10A (special circumstances), compared with 15,357 in (2.8% of infringements initiated). There were 6,591 (0.9% of infringements initiated) appeals against the PERIN Registrar s refusal to revoke initiated in open court, compared with 5,193 in Penalty Enforcement Warrants The issue of a Penalty Enforcement warrant is the last step in the PERIN Court fine enforcement process. Defendants are required to appear before a Magistrate who can order: imprisonment for one day for each penalty unit or part of a penalty unit remaining unpaid; a reduction of imprisonment of up to two thirds; or a Community Based Order in exceptional circumstances. Additionally a Magistrate can discharge the fine, in part or in whole, or adjourn the hearing with conditions if the defendant is found to have a mental disorder or intellectual impairment. PERIN Court Registrars appear at the Melbourne Magistrates Court as a friend of the court to provide assistance to Magistrates in all Penalty Enforcement Warrant hearings. *Figures exclude numerous applications for bail and variations of bail that are made orally, which are not counted for statistical purposes. 28 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

31 Civil Jurisdiction Civil Jurisdiction at a Glance Objective Finalise 75.0% of defended claims within six months of the defence notice being filed. Results Civil complaints issued or filed increased by 10.2%, totalling 78,444. Defended claims finalised decreased by 1.5%, totalling 9,360. Claims finalised at pre-hearing conferences decreased by 5.4%, totalling 3,687. Defended claims finalised when listed for hearing decreased by 0.8%, totalling 3,185. Finalised 74.6% of defended claims within six months and 92.7% within 12 months of the defence notice being filed. Defended claims pending on 30 June 2005 decreased by 8.2%, totalling 3,407. Future Finalise 75.0% of defended claims within six months of the defence notice being filed. The Civil Jurisdiction of the Court underwent significant change during , with the introduction of the Magistrates Court (Increased Civil Jurisdiction) Act 2004 (No: 68/2004) increasing the monetary value of the Court s jurisdiction from $40,000 to $100,000 and increasing the monetary limit of proceedings referred to arbitration from $5,000 to $10,000. These increases commenced on 1 January The Overriding Objective The Overriding Objective was inserted in the Court Rules from 1 January, 2005, as outlined below: The Overriding Objective must be taken into consideration by a Magistrate or a Registrar who is constituting a court and requires the Court to actively manage cases by encouraging parties to cooperate with each other (including encouraging the use of alternative dispute resolution), identify the issues in a dispute promptly and to justly deal with cases effectively, promptly and economically. The Overriding Objective also requires the Court to employ technology where available and reasonable. Amendments The Court made amendments to the following court procedures. Pleadings The changes to pleadings (operational from 1 March 2005) are intended to elicit more information from parties about the claim and defence than is presently the case in many disputes before the Court. The changes will not affect arbitrations, which are to be pleaded in a simplified form. The changes require: (a) a statement of claim to plead the material facts that establish the cause of action and the necessary particulars of those material facts; (b) introduction of a reply to be used in limited circumstances; (c ) introduction of a power to stay a proceeding, make an order in favour of a party or to strike out or amend any pleading that does not disclose a cause of action, or that is scandalous, frivolous or vexatious; and (d) power to strike out or amend extending to those pleadings that may prejudice, embarrass or delay the fair hearing of the proceeding or are otherwise an abuse of process. These changes apply only to proceedings where the amount sought in the claim is $10,000 or more. Arbitration The increase in the arbitration limit to less than $10,000 has led to simplified court processes. New pleading requirements do not apply; instead, parties are only required to give adequate notice of the claim or defence. The statement of claim need only state the date, place, circumstances and cause of action upon which the claim is based, together with the amount or other relief or remedy sought. A notice of defence must state the date, place, circumstances, facts or matters relied on in defence of the claim. All interlocutory steps have been removed in an attempt to simplify the overall proceeding. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 29

32 Civil Jurisdiction Civil Case Activity No Complaints Issued or Filed Defended Claims Finalised The number of civil complaints issued or filed increased by 10.2%, totalling 78, Defended Claims Pending Civil Cases by Lodgement Type Processed by EDI Processed by Registrar 51% 49% In place of Discovery, with regard to claims for $5,000 to less than $10,000, parties are required to exchange a list of documents not less than 14 days before the date fixed for a pre-hearing conference or arbitration. Proceedings where the claim is for $1,000 or more are referred to a prehearing conference (except claims for property damage arising out of a motor vehicle accident). Pre-hearing Conferences Pre-hearing conferences are normally conducted by registrars but may be held by a Magistrate. Registrars apply mediation and conciliation skills and exercise powers of the Court to ensure the expeditious finalisation of disputes. While the early focus of pre-hearing conferences was to improve caseflow management, over the years registrars have more fully developed the alternative dispute resolution aspects of the process in an effort to assist litigants to settle proceedings at an early opportunity. Notwithstanding the introduction of increased jurisdiction in 1997 (and the inherent additional complexity) the annual finalisation rates of cases at prehearing conference, at Melbourne, has risen from 64% in 1996 to 72% at 30 June The impact of further jurisdictional changes in 2005 is not expected to substantially affect finalisation rates. The Rules relating to attendance at prehearing conference were upgraded in April 2005 and should assist registrars to obtain settlement of disputes. The changes require that all relevant and interested parties attend, placing conferences on the same footing as the new mediation process. Attendance can be made by telephone where personal attendance would cause unreasonable expense or inconvenience. Slightly more than half of all civil cases were lodged via the electronic data interchange (EDI) service. How We Handle Civil Complaints Complaint Issued or Filed Age of Pending Cases in Months as at 30 June Defence Filed? No Defence Filed? Yes % No Action Default Order Summary Order Arbitration Mediation Pre-Hearing Conference Consent Orders Yes Settled? No Final Hearing <3 3<6 6<9 9<12 12<18 18< Enforcement Of defended claims pending as at 30 June 2005, 84.1% had been pending for six months or less. Attachment of Earnings Attachment of Debt Instalment Application Warrant to Seize Property Oral Examination 30 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

33 The pre-hearing conference process has been developed to include devolution of the Court s directions and interlocutory powers to registrars. This process began in 1996 and the powers were substantially increased in April The extra powers given to registrars are consistent with the requirements of the Overriding Objective and include the power to: extend or abridge time limits for taking steps in a proceeding; adjourn a pre-hearing conference and to order costs of the adjournment; consolidate proceedings; join third parties or other parties to a proceeding; transfer a proceeding between Court venues; give directions for the conduct of a proceeding; order inspection of property; order that a complaint be determined by Hearing (according to the Rules of Evidence) rather than Arbitration; dismiss a proceeding or strike out a defence for failure to provide particulars; dismiss a proceeding or strike out a defence for failure to make discovery; dismiss a proceeding or strike out a defence for failure to answer interrogatories; allow amendment of any document in a proceeding and to reserve costs of the amendment; and dismiss a claim or strike out a defence for failure to attend the prehearing conference and to make a final order. Affected parties may appeal against a Registrar s decision within 14 days after the date of the order. Mediation As a result of the jurisdictional increase, which will require the Court to determine disputes of a more complex and costly nature, and the success of the mediation pilot conducted from 2003 to 2005, the Court has made Rules for mediation. Mediation is an alternative to pre-hearing conference and will operate alongside pre-hearing conferences as a process for early resolution of disputes. Mediation must be conducted, in appropriate cases, by an acceptable mediator who may be a court registrar, a barrister or solicitor approved by the Law Institute of Victoria or the Victorian Bar or a person who is approved by the Court. It is anticipated that under the Court-ordered model most mediations will be conducted by acceptable barrister and solicitor mediators. Assessment of Costs Rules for assessment (taxing) of costs commenced on 1 January 2005 to enable appropriate recovery of costs arising from the increased monetary jurisdiction. Time Taken to Finalise Claims at Pre-Hearing Conference % 100 Time Taken to Finalise Claims at Hearing % < 3 0 < 3 3 < < < 9 6 < < < < < < < Time Taken to Finalise Claims at Arbitration % < 3 3 < < < < < Default Judgments by Type of Lodgement % Processed by Registrar Processed by EDI Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 31

34 Civil Jurisdiction The Rules are adapted from relevant County Court Rules and allow a party to apply to a registrar for costs to be assessed and allow a Magistrate to order an assessment by a registrar. Previously the Court was required to fix the costs at the time of the hearing and it may still do so. Scale of Costs In anticipation of the increased monetary jurisdiction the Court revised the scale of party and party costs and, from 1 January 2005, allowance is made for the increased value of claims. In addition to the existing cost columns a further two have been added: $40,000 to less than $70,000 and $70,000 and over. Circuit fees have been introduced for proceedings where the amount sought in the claim is $40,000 or more. Forms The Court changed Form 4A (complaint), Form 7A, Form 7AB (counterclaim) and Form 9A (notice of defence). Each form contains advice about the content of the statement of claim, counterclaim or defence. The requirement for a sketch plan of the collision in a claim arising out of a motor vehicle accident has been removed. However, the requirement for the attachment to the complaint of an itemised quotation or an assessment of the loss remains. Complaints Issued or Filed Part 5 of the Act deals with civil proceedings and the nature of the causes of action that can be heard and determined by the Court. The nature of causes are broad and include claims for damages, debt and equitable relief. Principally, the jurisdiction of the Court is limited in two ways: The amount claimed or the value of the relief sought must not exceed the jurisdictional limit of $100,000 (as from 1 January 2005). The material part of the cause of action must arise in Victoria or the defendant must reside within Victoria at the time the complaint is served. This legislation provides for a simplified means of hearing and determining claims for monetary relief amounting to less than $10,000 (as from 1 January 2005). The Magistrates Court (Arbitration)(Professional Costs) Regulations 2004 set out the limitations regarding costs awarded to parties in these proceedings. The Magistrates Court Civil Procedure Rules 1999 (the Rules) prescribe how parties are to conduct proceedings. The Court s Civil Rules Committee, comprising a Deputy Chief Magistrate, Magistrates, registrars and barristers and solicitors representing the peak legal bodies, reviews the Rules from time-totime and amendments are made by the Chief Magistrate with two or more Deputy Chief Magistrates. Most claims listed for a hearing by a Magistrate undergo a pre-hearing conference an essential part of resolving civil claims. Registrars and Deputy Registrars experienced in alternative dispute resolution methods conduct these conferences. The number of civil complaints issued or filed in totalled 78,444, representing an overall 10.2% increase compared with 71,165 issued or filed in Of this figure 1,006 were issued for amounts exceeding $40,000 representing claims issued under the new jurisdictional limit. Filing Complaints Legal practitioners can file a complaint with the Court electronically using the Electronic Data Interchange Service (EDI). EDI processes the complaint without intervention by a Court Registrar. The proportion of complaints filed electronically with the Court has increased steadily since EDI was introduced in In legal practitioners filed 50.8% of complaints with the Court via EDI, a 3.2% rise compared with 47.6% in Notices of Defence A defendant may give notice of defence at any time after receiving a complaint. Where an order has already been made on the claim, or an earlier defence has been struck out by the Court, leave of a Magistrate is required. 32 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

35 When a notice of defence is filed with a Registrar the proceeding is normally referred to a pre-hearing conference before a Registrar or listed for arbitration. If the proceeding is not settled at pre-hearing conference it is listed for hearing or arbitration. During the Court experienced a decrease in the number of defences filed, totalling 9,995, compared with 10,729 in The proportion of defended claims where the claim amount exceeded $10,000 decreased 7.7%, totalling 3,234. The number of defended claims involving amounts up to $10,000 decreased by 6.4%, totalling 6,761, compared with 7,226 in Defended Claims Finalised The number of defended claims finalised totalled 9,360, representing a 1.5% decrease, compared with 9,499 finalised in Of the 9,360 defended claims finalised, 74.6% were finalised within six months of a defence notice being filed and 92.7% within 12 months. This result compares with 74.7% being finalised within six months of a defence notice being filed and 94.8% within 12 months in Of the total claims finalised in , 81.2% were finalised by way of a default judgment and 18.8% were finalised after a defence notice was filed. This result compares with when the Court finalised 80.1% of claims by way of a default judgment and 19.9% after a defence notice was filed. Caseflow Management Prior to Hearing Generally the Court does not conduct directions hearings; instead pre-hearing conferences remain an integral part of the Court s caseflow management processes. Additional powers, including directions powers, granted to registrars strengthen the caseflow management aspects of pre-hearing conferences without diminishing the emphasis on dispute resolution. Pre-Hearing Conferences In the specialised role of Pre-hearing Conference Convenor, registrars, Senior Deputy Registrars and, at times, Magistrates, order pre-hearing conferences in defended civil proceedings and constitute the Court under the Act and the Rules. Convenors conduct pre-hearing conferences at Court venues with a civil registry. At Melbourne, where the majority of the Court s civil business is listed, two Deputy Registrars act as Convenors, conducting up to 30 conferences each day. Summons for Oral Examination Issued % Notices of Objection Finalised by Outcome No Processed by Registrar Warrants to Seize Property Issued % Processed by EDI Processed by Registrar Processed by EDI Granted Refused Struck Out Withdrawn Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 33

36 Civil Jurisdiction Instalment Orders Finalised by Outcome No On receipt of a notice of defence, the Convenor sets down the matter for a pre-hearing conference within eight to 10 weeks. The Convenor allocates a date and time for the conference with the aim of minimising waiting periods and During the number of claims finalised at a pre-hearing conference totalled 3,687, representing a 5.4% decrease, compared with 3,897 claims finalised in Almost all claims were finalised within 12 months of a unnecessary delays. The conference brings the parties together so that disputed issues can be identified and clarified, providing an opportunity for settlement to take place. At the conference, the Convenor estab- defence notice being filed. Of the 3,687 claims finalised, 86.7% were finalised within six months of the defence notice being filed and 97.8% within 12 months. This result compares with 88.1% being finalised within six Granted Refused Struck Out Withdrawn lishes the: months and 98.1% within 12 months in nature of issues in dispute; Attachment of Debt Applications Finalised by Outcome No Attachment of Earnings Applications Finalised by Outcome No Granted Refused Struck Out Withdrawn Unknown nature, number and availability of witnesses to be called; requirements for interpreters, if any; estimated amount of court time to be allocated for the hearing or arbitration; and timeframe for proper interlocutory steps as required. To assist the parties in dispute to resolve issues, including the whole of the dispute, the Convenor allocates a substantial amount of conference time to discussion and negotiation. The Convenor monitors the readiness of the parties for hearing, their compliance with any orders made at the conference and any progress toward settlement. The Convenor lists a proceeding for hearing Mediations In October 2002, the Court commenced a mediation pilot at Melbourne and the first mediation was conducted in February Throughout the pilot, parties to a dispute have been able to choose a barrister and solicitor as a mediator; however, most mediations have been conducted by registrars. Mediations are held one day per week by the pre-hearing conference registrars who are also qualified mediators. Mediation allows parties more time to discuss and negotiate issues in dispute than is normally available in pre-hearing conferences. Depending upon the complexity of the matter mediations are allocated times that vary from three hours to one day only after he or she determines that it is ready for adjudication and, if needed, makes the appropriate interlocutory During , 146 mediations were listed before a Registrar. Of these mediations, 96 were conducted and orders in readiness for hearing. The Convenor provides hearing dates in finalised. A further 49 were listed for a pre-hearing conference or telephone 200 consultation with the Civil Listing mention and 23 were listed before a Coordinator. Magistrate for a contested hearing. Granted Refused Struck Out Withdrawn 34 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

37 In addition independent mediators conducted eight mediations. Of these mediations, two were resolved and six were referred back to the court for determination. Hearings Where a matter fails to resolve at prehearing conference or mediation, the Registrar will fix a date for hearing or arbitration by a Magistrate. The nature and complexity of the dispute affects the amount of time to be allocated for the hearing. Accurate estimates are crucial to enable efficient disposition of available judicial resources. During , the number of defended claims finalised when listed for hearing before a Magistrate totalled 3,185, representing an 0.8% decrease, compared with 3,212 defended claims finalised in Of the 3,185 defended claims finalised, 50.6% were finalised within six months of the defence notice being filed and 83.0% within 12 months. This result compares with 50.3% being finalised within six months of the defence notice being filed and 88.9% within 12 months in Arbitrations As from 1 January 2005, where a claim amounts to less than $10,000 the Court must refer the matter to arbitration by a Magistrate. These matters are conducted with less formality than hearings, and the Court is not bound by the Rules of Evidence. Arbitrations are listed as expeditiously as possible. Where a proceeding involves complex questions of law or fact or where it is considered undesirable that the matter be referred to arbitration, the Court may order that the complaint be heard and determined in a formal hearing. Where the Court awards a party less than $500, costs must not be awarded unless there are special circumstances. Other limitations apply to costs in arbitration. During , the number of defended claims finalised by arbitration totalled 2,488, compared with 2,390 in , representing an increase of 4.1%. Of the 2,488 defended claims finalised by arbitration, 87.5% were finalised within six months of the defence notice being filed and 97.4% within 12 months. This result compares with 85.8% being finalised within six months of the defence notice being filed and 97.5% within 12 months in Complaints Pending Complaints pending represent claims waiting to be determined and cover the elapsed time between the date the complaint was issued and 30 June each year. On 30 June 2005 the number of defended claims pending totalled 3,407, a decrease of 8.2%, compared with 3,710 pending on 30 June Claims pending for more than six months represented 15.8% of defended claims (14.0% in ) and cases pending for more than 12 months represented 6.4% (8.2% in ). Default Judgments During , the number of default judgments totalled 40,542, representing a 5.7% increase, compared with 38,340 in Legal practitioners lodge requests for default judgments online by way of the EDI, eliminating the need for attendance at a court. Upon receipt, applications for default judgments are processed electronically without the need for intervention by a Court Registrar. In , 35.2% of default judgments were made upon lodging an application via the EDI, compared with 34.5% in Industrial Division On the 2 August 2004, the Chief Magistrate issued Practice Direction No 5/2004 to revitalise the Industrial Division of the Court to deal with certain types of proceedings arising out of the employer/employee relationship. This practice simplified the procedure for the resolution of disputes between employees and employers over employee entitlements, whether those entitlements arise under a contract of employment, an Award, Certified Agreement, Australian Workplace Agreement, the Workplace Relations Act 1996, the Long Service Leave Act 1993, the Public Holidays Act 1993 or the Outworkers (Improved Protection) Act The list is managed as a pilot from the Melbourne Magistrates Court, originally for six months from 2 August The pilot arrangements have been extended indefinitely. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 35

38 Civil Jurisdiction All claims by an employee against an employer issued out of the Industrial Division of the Court are in a modified Complaint (Form 4A) which includes Defence Notices (Form 9A) and Counterclaim (Form 7A) all of which are available on the Court s web site. This division of the Court encompasses the following statutes: Long Service Leave Act Public Holidays Act Outworkers (Improved Protection) Act Federal Awards (Uniform Systems) Act Child Employment Act Workplace Relations Act Occupational Health and Safety Act The most common proceedings are for enforcement of awards, which are brought by the individual affected, that is the employee, or by a registered organisation (union) on his or her behalf. Union representatives often appear on behalf of their members and employer organisations on behalf of their members. In addition, the Commonwealth Department of Employment and Workplace Relations often can bring proceedings to prosecute allegations of underpayment or to assist in the conduct of a case. Each of these parties has standing to appear. In addition to the claim, a union or employer organisation may seek that penalties be imposed upon a party alleged to have breached an award or agreement. In 2003 the State Government and the Federal Government reached agreement as to reinstatement of award regulation for Victorian employees not covered by existing federal awards. That coverage will be implemented by way of a common rule award. A common rule award is effectively an existing federal award that is declared by the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) to operate in a particular State and in an industry sector. This award creates new and additional work for the Industrial Division of the Court. In addition to the State Award and Common Rule Award system, a distinct Federal Award and Industrial Agreement System continues to operate in relation to Victoria. Prosecutions for breach of provisions of the Federal Act are able to be conducted in the Court (see s285a F of the Workplace Relations Act). They are determined at least in part by the AIRC and are subject to an Industrial Agreement made in that jurisdiction. These proceedings are regarded as civil in nature and not criminal proceedings [See Gapes v. The Commonwealth Bank of Australia ( ALR 87)]. Federal Award employees may choose either the Federal Court or a court of competent jurisdiction in their State for enforcing their award entitlements. (See s177, s178 and s179 of the Workplace Relations Act). An individual seeking to recover underpayment of wages is entitled to claim in the Court to the extent of its jurisdictional limit of $100,000. Listing and Hearing Procedure A modified complaint is used to initiate a proceeding in this jurisdiction. Where a defence is received the matter is listed for a directions hearing before a Magistrate within 21 days, or as near as practicable to that date. At the directions hearing the Magistrate endeavours to ascertain the matters in dispute between the parties and explore the possibility of settlement. If the proceeding cannot be resolved at the directions hearing it will be referred to a pre-hearing conference to be conducted by a registrar or listed before a Magistrate for final determination. In order to facilitate the proper management of proceedings parties are required to be able to advise the number of witnesses proposed to be called, any arrangements for an interpreter, whether any interlocutory orders are sought and the existence of any jurisdictional issues. Small Claims Procedure The Small Claims procedure is prescribed by the Workplace Relations Act for claims amounting to less than $10,000. If a claim is not resolved at a directions hearing, pre-hearing conference or mediation, it is listed for determination and allocated a period of two hours commencing at 9.30 a.m. In , 159 complaints were issued and 41 matters finalised, representing a 25.8% completion rate. As at 30 June 2005, 118 matters were pending, comprising 113 matters listed for mention, or on a date to be fixed, and five complaints listed for a defended hearing. 36 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

39 Interstate Registrations and Tribunal Orders Interstate judgments can be enforced against an individual, firm or corporation domiciled or having a registered office in Victoria. Since each State has its own legislation pertaining to enforcement of debt orders, a sealed copy of the order, together with an affidavit in support, must be registered in the Court to enable enforcement action to take place. In most cases orders made by Victorian tribunals (e.g. Small Claims Tribunal, Residential Tenancies Tribunal) have no statutory power to enforce monetary orders; thus the need exists to register such orders with the Court. During , interstate judgments and Victorian tribunal orders registered totalled 3,607. These matters involved judgment debts made in another State of Australia or Victorian tribunal (e.g. Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Residential Tribunal and Small Claims Tribunal). Enforcement Actions A significant part of the Court s jurisdiction involves the enforcement of judgments. Judgments may be: entered by application for a default order; entered at a hearing or arbitration; registered from other jurisdictions; or entered upon reinstatement of a matter. A judgment may be enforced in a number of ways, which include issuing: a Warrant to Seize Property; a Summons for Oral Examination; or an Application for an Instalment Order or to Attach Earnings. In , the number of Summonses for Oral Examination issued in totalled 16,143 representing a decrease of 2.7%, compared with 16,603 in The proportion of Summonses for Oral Examination issued upon lodging an application via the EDI represented 37.7%, compared with 37.8% in In , the Court issued 8,503 Warrants to Seize Property during , an increase of 9.1%, compared with 7,797 in The proportion of Warrants to Seize Property issued upon lodging an application via the EDI made up 27.2% of warrants issued, compared with 23.0% in Where an order has been made and granted or refused by a Registrar, the judgment debtor or creditor may apply to a Registrar for a Notice of Objection or an Instalment Order under the provisions of the Judgment Debt Recovery Act In such instances, the matter may be referred to a Magistrate for determination. The number of Notices of Objection applied for in totalled 96, representing a decrease of 9.4%, compared with 106 in The number finalised totalled 90, compared with 99 in The number of such objections granted represented the total of all objections confirmed or varied. The number of Instalment Orders applied for in totalled 740, representing a decrease of 16.8%, compared with 889 in The number finalised totalled 744, compared with 818 in The number of Instalment Orders granted represented the total of all orders confirmed or varied. Where the Court makes an order, it may be enforced by an Application for an Attachment of Debt or Attachment of Earnings. The number of applications for an Attachment of Debt received in totalled 144, representing a decrease of 4.7%, compared with 151 in The number finalised totalled 128, compared with 152 in The number of applications for an Attachment of Earnings received in totalled 1,736, representing a decrease of 6%, compared with 1,844 in The number finalised totalled 1,660, compared with 1,678 in Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 37

40 Family Law Jurisdiction Family Law Jurisdiction at a Glance Objective Hear all applications filed under the Family Law Act 1975 (as amended) in an efficient and timely manner. Results The number of orders made totalled 2,709, representing a decrease of 16.0%, compared with 3,229 orders made in Future Continue to hear and determine many applications for orders in the Family Law jurisdiction, particularly in country locations. Orders Made under Family Law Act to No The Court has jurisdiction to deal with some matters pursuant to the Family Law Act 1975 (as amended), Child Support Assessment Act 1989, Regulations (Cwlth), Commonwealth Marriage Act 1961 and Firearms Act 1996 (relating to intervention orders). The Court deals with many applications listed at first instance for transfer to the Family Court, or to the Federal Magistrates Service, on circuit or in metropolitan locations. During the reporting year, the Court dealt with a variety of applications seeking interim or final orders pursuant to these Acts, including applications relating to: child contact and residence; spousal maintenance and enforcement orders; adult child maintenance where certain circumstances exist; enforcement of child maintenance orders; departure from child support assessments; declarations for eligibility for child support under section 106 of the Child Support Assessment Act; declarations for authority to marry under age (marriage of minors) pursuant to the Commonwealth Marriage Act; resolution of property distribution; authority for registration of a change of a child s name or authority to have a passport issued in certain circumstances; the separate representation of children before transfer to the Family Court; and seeking a declaration to be a nonprohibited person pursuant to section 189 of the Firearms Act (after the Court has made an intervention order). Orders Made In , the number of orders made totalled 2,709, compared with 3,229 in , representing a decrease of 16.0%. Orders made in the Court included all: interim and final orders, including those matters transferred to the Family Court; and orders where an interim order had been made and the matter adjourned for further hearing. Maintaining Close Links There is a significant inter-relationship between the Family Law and Crimes Family Violence jurisdictions. For example, when making an intervention order, a Magistrate may make, revive, vary or suspend a child contact order, pursuant to section 68T of the Family Law Act in certain circumstances injunctions; making, reviving, varying or discharging child contact orders (when making an intervention order pursuant to section 68T of the Family Law Act); The Supervising Magistrate for Family Law and Family Violence ensures close links and the exchange of information are maintained between the Family Court and Magistrates Court. The Court experienced a continued decline in Orders made under the Family Law jurisdiction. 38 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

41 Crimes Family Violence Jurisdiction Crimes Family Violence Jurisdiction at a Glance Objective Finalise 99.0% of complaints within six months of being issued. Results Complaints issued increased by 15.7%, totalling 24,060. Complaints finalised between family members rose by 27.3%, totalling 18,511. Complaints finalised based on allegations of stalking rose by 12.8%, totalling 6,378. Finalised 94% of complaints within six months of being issued. Complaints pending on 30 June 2005 rose by 20.7%, totalling 1,301. Future Finalise 99.0% of complaints within six months of being issued. The Court has exclusive jurisdiction to deal with matters under the Crimes (Family Violence) Act 1987 at first instance. Complaints for intervention orders can be made pursuant to section 4 of the Crimes (Family Violence) Act for family members and those involved in intimate personal relationships. In addition, complaints can be made with respect to stalking behaviour provisions under section 21A of the Crimes Act Ongoing Support The Supervising Magistrate continued to oversee, monitor and support the Court s response in both the Crimes Family Violence and Family Law jurisdictions, including ongoing support for: communication between the Court and agencies involved with parts of the Family Violence and Family Law jurisdiction of the Court; links to local family violence services and support networks and men s counselling programs; numerous referral groups and steering committees; and a referral to Mediation Process for Neighbourhood Disputes using the Dispute Settlement Centre of Victoria located at a number of metropolitan Court locations. Complaints Issued During , the number of Complaints for an Intervention Order commenced in the Court increased by 15.7%, totalling 24,060, compared with 20,789 in This increase was largely driven by Victoria Police as a result of the introduction of the Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence in September After-Hours Service A large proportion of activities performed by the After-Hours Service related to Complaints for an Intervention Order. Only a member of the police force may make a Complaint for an Intervention Order outside normal business hours. During , the number of Complaints for an Intervention Order processed by the After-Hours Service increased by 66%, totalling 4,677, Crimes Family Violence Case Activity to No Complaints Issued Complaints Finalised Complaints Pending The Court experienced increases in complaints issued, finalised and pending. Types of Complaints for Intervention Orders Finalised Allegations of Stalking Behaviour (s21a Crimes Act) Complaints between Family Members 74% 26% The majority of Intervention Orders made continued to involve complaints between family members. Age of Pending Complaints at 30 June to % <3 Months 3<6 Months 6<9 Months 9<12 Months 12 Months Of complaints pending as at 30 June 2005, 94% had been pending for less than six months. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 39

42 Crimes Family Violence Jurisdiction compared with 2,817 in the This increase is attributed to the introduction of the Victoria Police Code of Practice for the Investigation of Family Violence in September Complaints Finalised Of the Complaints for an Intervention Order finalised in , 74% related to family members (72% in ) and 26% were based on allegations of stalking pursuant to section 21A of the Crimes Act (28% in ). During , the number of complaints finalised that related to family members increased by 27.3%, totalling 18,511, compared with 14,546 finalised in This figure included approximately 1,000 Complaints for an Intervention Order that were finalised as a result of audit activity. Many of these complaints had been finalised in previous financial years; however, they had not been correctly recorded as finalised on the Courtlink database. Of these complaints, 53% resulted in the Court making an intervention order, compared with 56% in Where an intervention order was not made, the Complaint was more likely to be withdrawn by the complainant or struck out due to non-appearance by the complainant than refused by a Magistrate (e.g. intervention orders were refused in 4% of complaints). During , the number of Complaints finalised that related to the stalking provisions of the Crimes Act increased by 12.8%, totalling 6,378, compared with 5,653 in Of these Complaints, 47% resulted in an intervention order being made (49% in ). Counting rules used to collate data on finalised Complaints for an Intervention Order are based on slightly different counting rules to that used for reporting the number of cases finalised for output reporting/budget Paper No 3 purposes. Time Taken to Finalise Complaints for an Intervention Order Of all Complaints for an Intervention Order finalised in : 79% were finalised within 30 days of the complaint being made (83% in ); 9% were finalised within 31 to 60 days (8% in ); and 12% were finalised in excess of 60 days (8% in ). Overall, the Court finalised 94% of Complaints within six months of being issued (98% in ). Relationship of Aggrieved Person to Defendant The Complaint for an Intervention Order sets out the relationship between the applicant and the defendant, and may include multiple aggrieved persons if children are included and the complaint in relation to the children arose out of the same or similar circumstances to that of the parent. In , the Court finalised complaints relating to intervention orders for 33,557 aggrieved persons (26,816 in ). Of the complaints finalised, the Court granted intervention orders for 17,492 aggrieved persons (52%), as follows: 13,253 (76%) aggrieved persons were family members, compared with 10,739 (74%) in ; and 4,239 (24%) aggrieved persons were involved in complaints made based on stalking allegations, compared with 3,781 (26%) in Secondary Applications Where a Magistrate has previously made an intervention order, a party to a proceeding may make a secondary application under the Crimes (Family Violence) Act to extend, vary or revoke that order. During , the Court finalised 2,306 secondary applications, representing a 10% increase, compared with 2,092 in Secondary applications comprised: 514 to extend an intervention order (469 in ); 888 to vary an intervention order (725 in ); and 904 to revoke an intervention order (898 in ). Complaints Pending The number of Complaints for an Intervention Order pending on 30 June 2005 totalled 1,301, compared with 1,078 on 30 June 2004, representing an increase of 20.7%. This increase is attributed to a higher number of cases commencing during the reporting period compared with previous years. Of the Complaints pending on 30 June 2005, 87% had been pending for less than three months (87% in ) and 94% had been pending for less than six months (95% in ). 40 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

43 Family Violence Court Division The Family Violence Court Division commenced at Ballarat and Heidelberg on 14 June The Division will operate as a pilot until 30 June 2007 and will specialise in hearing family violence cases. Development of the Division During a significant effort was directed toward the development of the Family Violence Court Division by Court staff, including: the development of court processes and procedures to support the operation of the Division; enhancements to the Court s case management system to accommodate counselling orders; renovations to court premises at Ballarat and Heidelberg to accommodate additional staff; the recruitment of specialist Family Violence Court Division Registrars, Family Violence Applicant Workers and Family Violence Defendant Workers; and the appointment of additional security officers at each site. Legislation The Magistrates Court (Family Violence) Act 2004 amended the Magistrates Court Act 1989 and the Crimes (Family Violence) Act 1987 to create the Family Violence Court Division of the Magistrates Court of Victoria and provide for defendants against whom an intervention order has been made to court-directed counselling. Objectives The objectives of the Family Violence Court Division are to: simplify access to the justice system for people who have experienced family violence; increase and promote the safety of people affected by family violence; increase accountability of individuals who have used violence toward family members and encourage behaviour change; and increase the protection of children exposed to family violence. Definition of Family Violence For the purposes of the jurisdiction of the Family Violence Court Division, family violence by a person means the person has: assaulted (within the meaning given by section 31 of the Crimes Act) a family member or caused damage to a family member s property; threatened to assault (within the meaning given by section 31 of the Crimes Act) a family member or cause damage to a family member s property; or harassed or molested a family member or behaved in an offensive manner toward a family member. Jurisdiction The Division has jurisdiction to deal with matters, which arise from or include allegations of family violence by a person and are within the jurisdiction of the Court, including: intervention order proceedings; civil proceedings for or with respect to damages for personal injury; family law proceedings arising under the Family Law Act 1975 (Cwlth) and the Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989 (Cwlth); criminal proceedings relating to summary offences, proceedings for indictable offences triable summarily and committal proceedings; and applications under the Victims of Crime Assistance Act 1996 where the act of violence that was the cause of the application was family violence. Key Features The Family Violence Court Division includes the following key features: Specialist support services located at court premises to support persons who have experienced family violence with their immediate physical and social needs. These services are provided by the Family Violence Applicant Worker, who provides information, advocacy and referral from the court premises to support services in the community. Specialist support service located at the court premises to support persons who are respondents to applications for an intervention order and/or charged with a criminal offence arising from or including allegations of family violence. This service is provided by the Family Violence Defendant Worker, who provides information, support and referrals from the court premises to support services in the community. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 41

44 Family Violence Court Division In addition, the Family Violence Defendant Worker undertakes eligibility assessments and prepares reports for the Division regarding a defendant s ability and capacity to participate in a specially-designed, court-directed counselling program when an intervention order has been made against them. Magistrates, registrars, police prosecutors, family violence applicant workers, family violence defendant workers, outreach workers and lawyers have special training and knowledge in family violence matters. Magistrates who hear and determine family violence cases in the Division have been specially assigned by the Chief Magistrate based on their knowledge and experience in dealing with such cases. Proceedings within the jurisdiction of the Division will be listed in a specially allocated courtroom. Evidence can be presented by witnesses in a number of ways including by use of video conference facilities, using screens to remove the defendant from the witness s line of vision in the courtroom, permitting a person to be beside the witness to provide emotional support while they are giving evidence, requiring legal practitioners to be seated while examining or cross-examining the witness, and restricting access to the courtroom by other persons while the witness is giving evidence. Additional security officers have been appointed to support the operation of the Division. The Magistrate can order men who use violence against their female partner or former partner, and who have had an intervention order made against them, to attend a special counselling program to change their violent and abusive behaviour. Magistrates may hear and determine different types of matters within the jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court, which arise from or include allegations of family violence concurrently. Where practicable, different types of matters relating to one incident or family may be heard before the same Magistrate on the one occasion (eg, application for an intervention order and criminal charges). 42 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

45 WorkCover Jurisdiction WorkCover Jurisdiction at a Glance Objective Hear and determine matters under the Accident Compensation Act 1958 as expeditiously as possible. Results Complaints issued decreased by 4.8%, totalling 1,174. Complaints finalised increased by 12.1%, totalling 879. Defences filed in relation to complaints decreased by 7.5%, totalling 1,055. Future Continue to hear and determine matters under the Accident Compensation Act as expeditiously as possible. WorkCover Complaints Activity No Complaints Issued Complaints Finalised The number of complaints issued decreased and complaints finalised increased. The Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine matters under the Accident Compensation Act 1958 and arising out of decisions of the Victorian WorkCover Authority, authorised insurer, employer, self-insurer or conciliation officer. Under section 43(1) (b) of the Accident Compensation Act, the Court is subject to two limitations: (a) the amount claimed or the value of the relief sought must not exceed the jurisdictional limit of $40,000; and (b) a material part of the cause of action needs to have arisen in Victoria or the residence of the defendant needs to be within Victoria at the time of service of the complaint. Complaints arising in the metropolitan area are issued out of the Court at Melbourne. WorkCover complaints originating outside the metropolitan area are heard and determined by Magistrates at Ballarat, Bendigo, Geelong, Mildura, Moe, Shepparton, Wangaratta and Hamilton. Practice Direction No. 2 of 2004, which has operated since 5 April 2004, applies only to proceedings issued out of the Comparison of Defences Filed and Complaints Issued % Defence Filed No Defence Filed The number of defences filed in relation to complaints represented 90% of all complaints issued. Court at Melbourne. This Practice Direction reduces delay for parties accessing the records of relevant medical practitioners and other health professionals. The introduction of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2004 and 14/2004: has streamlined the process for inspecting subpoenaed medical documents; eliminates the need for practitioners making oral applications in open court for documents to be released; and allows Magistrates to focus on the directions hearings and contested hearings before them. Enabling practitioners to inspect subpoenaed documents at least 14 days prior to the hearing has increased the number of contested hearings being dealt with on the first listing of a contest. During the number of matters finalised by the Court increased by 12%. This result can be attributed to implementation of Practice Direction No. 2 and 14 of 2004, which has reduced the number of adjournments sought at the first listing of the contest. Case Statistics In , the number of complaints issued totalled 1,174, representing a decrease of 4.8%, compared with 1,233 in The number of defences filed in relation to complaints issued totalled 1,055, representing a decrease of 7.5%, compared with 1,141 in This result represents 90% of all complaints issued, compared with 93% in The number of complaints finalised increased 21%, totalling 879, compared with 784 in Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 43

46 The Municipal Electoral Tribunal The Municipal Electoral Tribunal, constituted under the Local Government Act 1989, hears disputes arising from Victorian local government elections. The Tribunal is constituted by a Magistrate appointed by the Attorney- General. A candidate or 10 voters at the election may apply, in writing and within 14 days of the result, for the Tribunal to conduct an inquiry into the election. Upon conducting the inquiry and listening to any evidence called, the Tribunal may: declare that any person declared duly elected was not duly elected; declare any candidate duly elected who was not declared duly elected; declare an election void; dismiss or uphold an application in whole or in part; While the rules of evidence do not apply, and the Tribunal must act without regard to technicalities or legal forms, the burden of proof remains at all times with the applicant. Application for a review of a decision of the Tribunal is made to the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). The Municipal Electoral Tribunal continues to provide an efficient and effective forum for examination of the conduct of disputed local government elections. Statistics During the Tribunal held six directions hearings. Of these hearings, two were resolved and the remaining four were scheduled for hearing in amend or permit the amendment of an application; order the inspection and copying of documents in connection with the election; undertake a preliminary review of an application; or award any costs it deems appropriate. 44 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

47 Koori Court Koori Court at a Glance Objective The Koori Court aims to manage the disproportionate numbers of Aboriginal people in the criminal justice system by decreasing the numbers of repeat offenders, reducing failures to appear, decreasing breaches of court orders and increasing community safety. Results Presented findings of the Final Evaluation Report examining the Koori Court s first two years of operation as a pilot project. Shepparton Koori Court had a recidivism rate of approximately 12.5%. Re-offending rate at Broadmeadows was approximately 15.5%. Recidivism rates achieved were lower than the 29.4% general recidivism rate for all Victorians. Achieved reductions in offenders breaching correctional orders and failing to appear. The Magistrates Court (Koori Court) Act 2002 was proclaimed on 12 June The first Koori Court commenced at Shepparton in October 2002, followed by Broadmeadows in March 2003 and Warrnambool in January An offence can be dealt with in the Koori Court if: the offender is an Aborigine or Torres Strait Islander; the offence is within the jurisdiction of the Magistrates Court (although sexual offences and breaches of intervention orders are specifically excluded from the division); the offender pleads guilty to an offence and consents to the proceedings being dealt with by the Koori Court. As a division of the Magistrates Court, the Koori Court exercises the same sentencing powers that apply in the criminal division of the Magistrates Court. However the court differs in the way it conducts the sentencing hearing and, particularly, in the way members of the Aboriginal community participate in that hearing. One of the stated objectives of the Koori Court Act is to ensure greater participation of the Aboriginal community in the sentencing process of the Magistrates Court through the role played in that process by the Aboriginal Elder or Respected Person or others. The Koori Court has developed a procedure that ensures such participation is meaningful. During the sentencing hearing Aboriginal Elders or Respected Persons assist the presiding Magistrate. The Elders and Respected Persons are individuals recognised by the Koori community as significant community members and they bring wisdom and extensive cultural and community knowledge to the hearing process. Their advice on cultural matters is particularly important. The participation of the Aboriginal Elders and Respected Persons sends a clear message to offenders that the Aboriginal and non-aboriginal communities do not condone offenders misbehaviour. Elders and respected persons speak directly with an offender during the court process and often strongly communicate to the offender the consequences of the offending behaviour on victims and the community. This participation has resulted in a court that is culturally responsive whilst encouraging offenders to take responsibility for their actions. Also it provides a less alienating forum for offenders and allows them to give their account of the reasons for offending behaviour. The legislation requires hearings to be conducted with minimal formality and to be comprehensible to all the participants. Members of local communities often attend court and contribute to the hearing. The procedure is dynamic and inclusive. Cases take much longer than they would in normal court proceedings. There are many voices to be heard and the court is attentive to those voices. The process is resource-intensive meaning that only five to eight cases are listed on any Koori Court sitting day. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 45

48 Koori Court Project Manager Courts and Programs Development Daniel Briggs and Deputy Chief Magistrate Paul Grant. A Koori Court Officer assists the court, consulting with offenders and their families before, during and after the hearing. Koori Court Officers identify appropriate support systems for offenders and assess their ability to comply with the sentencing orders available to the court. The participation of Koori Court Officers is an important factor in reducing the risk of offenders breaching sentencing orders. Another strength of the court is its ability to coordinate various support agencies in the provision of assistance to offenders in dealing with particular problems that may have contributed to the offending behaviour. Final Evaluation Report Dr Mark Harris of La Trobe University has evaluated the Koori Courts at Shepparton and Broadmeadows. The report shows the Koori Court is achieving very positive results, with significantly reduced levels of recidivism amongst Koori defendants. The Shepparton Koori Court had a recidivism rate of approximately 12.5% for the two years of the pilot program. The re-offending rate at Broadmeadows was approximately 15.5%. Both rates are significantly less than the estimated general recidivism rate of 29.4% for all Victorians. Also there has been a reduction in offenders breaching correctional orders and a reduction in offenders failing to appear. Such outcomes have obvious benefits both to the offenders and to the broader community. Case Study No 1 At a Hamilton sitting of the Koori Court, outside the court house after proceedings were over, a defendants mother stated, I don t care what sentence a white-fella gives me or what he says, but I don t want to ever go up before any of my aunties or uncles who sit on the Koori Court. This comment is typical of many of the Indigenous people who witness the Koori Court in operation. Case Study No 2 Two defendants in their early forties appearing before the Koori Court had been in continual contact with the criminal justice system since teenagers. The defendants had spent their entire formative years in some form of custody. Since their appearance before the Koori Court, to date neither defendant has re-offended and both are continuing to address the underlying issues that led to their offending. 46 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

49 Drug Court Drug Court at a Glance Objectives Hear and determine Drug Court referrals in an efficient and timely manner. Results Received 46 referrals. Refused six referrals at the initial screening. Refused five referrals at assessment. Made 41 orders. Cancelled 20 orders. Participants completing, and graduating from, the program totalled 17. On 30 June 2005, two referrals were awaiting assessment. Future Continue to hear and determine Drug Court referrals in an efficient and timely manner. In May 2002, the Drug Court Division was established at the Dandenong Magistrates Court in response to the Victorian Government s commitment to trial a specialist drug court in the region. The Victorian Drug Court model is based on national and international best practice. How the Drug Court Operates The Drug Court Magistrate heads a team comprising a senior case manager and three case managers, two clinical advisers, a prosecutor and defence counsel, who is a Legal Aid solicitor and housing worker, treatment agencies, the Salvation Army Positive Lifestyle Program, South East Drug and Alcohol Service (SEADS) and local medical practitioners and pharmacies. Under Section 18Z of the Sentencing (Amendment) Act 2001, offenders are eligible for referral to the Drug Court if they plead guilty and reside within a postcode area specified in the Government Gazette, and are willing to consent, in writing, to such an order. Offenders accepted into the Drug Court program are placed on a drug treatment order, whereby they are sentenced to a term of imprisonment and a supervision order is imposed. The offender does not serve the term of imprisonment if they comply with the supervision order. Rewards and Sanctions At the Drug Court, Magistrates use rewards and incentives to acknowledge participants positive progress in addressing their drug or alcohol addiction and to encourage continuing compliance with the program. Magistrates also use sanctions to help motivate participants to comply with treatment conditions, thereby achieving the therapeutic goals of the Drug Court program. Rewards include verbal praise and encouragement and decreased supervision and court appearances, while sanctions can involve verbal warnings and increased supervision, court appearances or drug testing. In the Drug Court imposed 1,009 sanctions and 373 rewards. There were 229 variations made to orders and 1,452 imprisonment days served. These results compare with when 929 sanctions and 450 rewards were imposed with 105 variations and 603 days imprisonment served. Evaluation of the Pilot program In May 2005 Attorney-General Rob Hulls announced the continuation of the Drug Court as a sentencing option and released the Evaluation Report prepared by Turning Point Alcohol and Drug Centre and Health Outcomes International and Acumen Alliance. The evaluation findings showed that a vast majority of participants in the program have shown considerable improvement in welfare and social functioning and in the ability to live in a self-supporting way. The proportion of participants living with parents decreased from 39% to 18%, while the number living with friends reduced to nil. The proportion living in a relationship with a partner or with children increased from 22% to 41%. Income support, other than through unemployment benefits, increased from 15% to 39%, the full rate of employment Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 47

50 Drug Court From left, Chief Magistrate Ian Gray addresses guests at the Drug Court s third anniversary celebration in May 2005; Drug Court Magistrate Margaret Harding with Chief Magistrate Ian Gray. more than doubling from 11% to 25%. The proportion of unemployed participants reduced from 86% to 54%. Re-offending Rates For the period when participants were not in custody over the evaluation period participants committed offences at a substantially lower rate than the comparison group. Graduates of the Drug Court program re-offended at 32% of the rate of the comparison group who had been in prison. Cost Effectiveness Analysis When operating at 95% participation rate the Drug Court is less costly and more effective than incarceration. When operating at 90% the two alternatives are equal, but the evaluation found that the Drug Court would continue to be more effective in reducing re-offending. The evaluation findings concluded that overall the Drug Court has a strong, positive net value and that benefits would increase as more participants graduate and reintegrate into the community. During , 17 participants graduated compared with four participants in This increase was expected as the Drug Court completed its second year of the two-year Drug Treatment Order period. During the Drug Court received 46 referrals compared with 61 in This result was due to the Drug Court only having capacity to take on new participants if an existing order was cancelled or a participant graduated. It is proposed to employ another case manager in 2005 enabling additional participants to be placed on orders. As at 30 June 2005 legislation was before the Victorian Parliament to remove the sunset clause in the legislation and remove a loophole, which allows participants to abscond until the period of the Drug Treatment Order lapses, thereby enabling them to avoid having the order cancelled and serving the imprisonment component of the order. At the start of the pilot program a sworn police prosecutor was assigned to the Court. However over the period of the pilot it became obvious the program did not require the attendance and expertise of a sworn prosecutor other than on days when new applications or applications to cancel an order were before the Court. As a result the Court employed a Drug Court Liaison Officer to represent the police and community at case conferences and reviews. Community Awareness On the 21 June 2005 the Drug Court participated in Drug Action Week by conducting a mock court, which was attended by representatives of local agencies, local government and the community. Feedback was very positive 48 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

51 Referral Activity No Referrals Received Orders Made Orders Awaiting Assessment Orders Cancelled Fewer referrals were received while more orders were made. Outcome of Referrals Received Sanctions, Rewards, Variations and Imprisonment Days No Refused at Initial Screening Refused at Assessment Orders Made 76% Sanctions Imposed Variations Made to Orders 13% 11% Six referrals were refused at the initial screening and five referrals were refused at assessment Rewards Given Imprisonment Days Served The Drug Court experienced a significant rise in the number of imprisonment days served and imposed fewer rewards. and it is expected to become an annual feature of Drug Action Week. Referral Statistics Eligible participants were identified early and referred promptly to the Drug Court for immediate assessment and intervention. During , there were 46 referrals, compared with 61 in Of these referrals: six were refused at the initial screening (15 in ); five were refused at assessment (5 in ); and 41 orders were made (37 in ). On 30 June 2005, two referrals were awaiting assessment (four referrals on 30 June 2004). In , 20 orders were cancelled and 17 participants successfully graduated from the program. These results compare with 21 orders cancelled in and four graduates. During an effort was made to increase the case load of managers to 20, equating to an active case load of 60. However, it was found that the service to participants was restricted and the increased case load was too high. Since then agreement has been reached to allow a case load of 18 for a total of 54 active orders. Even with this number, during the demand for positions with the Drug Court continued to exceed availability. From 10 February to 10 March the Drug Court could not meet 22 enquiries for positions. Case Study Jerry becomes Offence and Heroin Free Jerry s criminal history began with numerous Children s Court appearances since the age of 12, resulting in supervision, probation, fines and periods in a Youth Training Centre. By 16 years of age, Jerry had started sniffing petrol, using cannabis, amphetamines and LSD and drinking heavily. At 25 Jerry was using heroin, at times spending more than $1,000 per day on drugs. He appeared in court 13 times for theft and property offences and served six months in prison for recklessly causing injury. Jerry had tried to stop using heroin a number of times through methadone and buprenorphine maintenance programs, as well as counselling, but with limited success. When sentenced to 16 months imprisonment for 13 offences, including theft, burglary and cultivating a narcotic plant, Jerry was placed on a Drug Treatment Order. He graduated after nearly two years but his transition was anything but trouble-free. It is a testament to the endurance and flexibility of the program and its case workers that the last 12 months of Jerry s Drug Treatment Order remained offence and heroin free. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 49

52 State Coroner s Office of Victoria State Coroner s Office at a Glance Objectives Complete investigations in an efficient and timely manner. Results Initiated a total of 4,620 investigations. Completed a total of 4,321 investigations (4,037 without an inquest and 284 with an inquest). Completed 73.9% of investigations without inquests within six months and 2.9% took longer than 24 months to complete. Completed 9.5% of investigations involving inquests within six months and 32.7% took longer than 24 months to complete. Investigations pending as at 30 June 2005 totalled 2,931. Future Complete investigations in an efficient and timely manner. From the State Coroner In we continued to undertake improvements and contributed significant achievements toward assisting the community. The release of the Victorian Attorney- General s 2004 Justice Statement highlighted the need to improve the Coroner s role in a number of key areas, namely: investigating deaths and fire; contributing to the health and safety of Victorians; and improving services to help families and others affected by the Coroner s process. Following the release of the Justice Statement, the Victorian Parliamentary Law Reform Committee received a reference from the Attorney-General to review the Coroners Act We have been involved in the process of assisting the Committee and preparing and presenting the Court s response. About 80 submissions were received on reform of the Act and the Committee s report is expected to be delivered by June Since early last year the State Coroner's Office, with the assistance of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine, has been operating the Family Contact Program. The program aims to streamline communication with families and improve service response. Shortly after the Coroner receives a report of a death, a trained staff member from the Coronial Services Centre contacts the family to give general information and basic advice on their rights and to provide a single point of contact. This program has been involved with families in the metropolitan area and will be introduced in the Moe region as a pilot for country and regional Victoria. We will work with pathologists, Court staff and police in this region to ensure that the pilot is successful. We continued to develop our coroners system and were aware of the need to be open to new ways of dealing with the increasing complexity of incidents occurring in the community that we are tasked to investigate. I would like to express my appreciation to my fellow coroners and staff and, in particular, the following individuals, for their assistance, valued work and dedication throughout the year under review: Principal Registrar Rick Roberts; my personal assistant Katrina Beesley; Sergeants Ed Pollard and Dave Dimsey and their fellow police officers at the Coroner s Assistants Unit; Magistrate-coroners and Court registrars from country Victoria; clinicians from the Clinical Liaison Service; and the Director and staff of the Victorian Institute of Forensic Medicine. Graeme Johnstone State Coroner 50 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

53 Our Achievements During we: provided an ongoing response in the aftermath of the Boxing Day Tsunami tragedy; established greater links with the medical profession and improved the quality of medical investigations through the Clinical Liaison Service. This service has proved to be of invaluable assistance in the investigation of deaths in the healthcare setting and improving the understanding across both the coronial and health care areas. It continues to be subject to funding difficulties; developed the Coroner s Work- Related Death Investigation and Resource Unit. The unit commenced work in September 2004; provided greater liaison with regional courts, performing duties in the coronial jurisdiction by developing a Coroners Practice Manual; provided ongoing training of country coroners and registrars; continued to develop greater links to community services for those bereaved through sudden death; and continued to develop links to community support services in rural Victoria to enable an improved response to the needs of the bereaved. Investigations Activity No Investigations Initiated Investigations Completed Investigations Pending We experienced increases in investigations initiated, completed and pending. Types of Investigations No Metropolitan Melbourne Without Inquest Rural Victoria With Inquest We completed the majority of investigations without the need for an inquest. Timeliness in Months % Without Inquest With Inquest 24+ We completed the majority of investigations without inquests within three months, whereas most investigations involving inquests lasted more than 24 months. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 51

54 Court Support Services Aboriginal Liaison Officer The Aboriginal Liaison Officer position was created as a result of the Victorian Aboriginal Justice Agreement. The service aims to address the over-representation of Indigenous people in the Victorian criminal justice system by working with indigenous clients when they enter the court system. In addition, the service helps Aboriginal people to maximise their chances of rehabilitation through culturally-appropriate and sensitive intervention. Specifically, the purpose of the Aboriginal Liaison Officer role is to: assist and advise the Court of matters relating to cultural issues that exist for indigenous people in Victoria; provide advice and access to services for indigenous offenders and families in their dealings with the Court; raise awareness within the criminal justice system of cross-cultural issues; provide advice and report to Magistrates and relevant court staff in relation to appropriate courses of action for Indigenous offenders; liaise with members of local Aboriginal communities to provide information about court processes; and consult, negotiate and liaise with Government agencies and non- Government organisations to coordinate service delivery and to promote knowledge of issues relating to Aboriginal persons. The Aboriginal Liaison Officer (ALO) is largely based at the Melbourne Magistrates Court and provides a statewide service to offenders, families of offenders, legal representatives and Magistrates. During the ALO provided assistance to an average of 18 clients per month. Community Forensic Mental Health Court Liaison Service The Community Forensic Mental Health Court Liaison Service is a courtbased psychiatric support service provided by Forensicare, the Victorian Institute of Forensic Mental Health. The Service was first established at the Melbourne Magistrates Court in November Due to increased demand from individuals and organisations across Victoria, the service has since been extended to other metropolitan Magistrates Courts at Broadmeadows in November 1996, Ringwood in January 2002 and Dandenong in July Experienced senior registered psychiatric nurses provide on-site services with an on-call consultant forensic psychiatrist and psychiatric team providing additional support when required. The Service provides thorough and impartial psychiatric assessments, consultation and advice to all metropolitan Court users, including the Magistrates Court. Clients comprise individuals who appear before the Court after being referred for assessment, requiring psychiatric intervention and support. An assessment typically involves information gathering, referral and links to either community or prison-based support services. The Service can effectively accelerate the sentencing process by reducing the frequency and length of custodial remands for psychiatric reports. The Service provides: psychiatric or bio-psychosocial assessments and subsequent recommendations and options regarding appropriate clinical management and welfare of referees; options for diverting mentally impaired offenders from the criminal justice system to appropriate health care specialists who can provide assessment and diagnostic skills in the community; coordinated referral and links to appropriate support services; consultation and networking with various support agencies, professional representatives and family members involved in a client s care; transfer of acutely mentallyimpaired clients to appropriate mental health services; and 52 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

55 training and education for support services staff regarding interaction with, and operation of, mental health services in the context of the court system. To aid in the exchange of mental health information and to promote continuity of care for mentally-impaired offenders, a critical role of the service has been to develop and maintain strong relationships with community health and welfare agencies, area mental health services, the Custodial Nursing Service, metropolitan police cells, the Melbourne Custody Centre, public and private prison systems and private practitioners. Statistics During , the service assisted 849 of 1,200 referred clients, compared with 825 in , representing a 2.9% increase. In addition, the service assisted 2,504 family members and various professional persons involved in court attendance and the continuing care of clients. This result compares with 2,013 in , representing a 24.3% increase. Representatives of the service attended court on 523 occasions, compared with 569 in , representing a 8.1% decrease, and completed 1,184 reports and file entries, compared with 1,157 in , a 2.3% increase. The service gave psychiatric consultative advice and assistance on 3,845 occasions, compared with 2,358 occasions in , representing a 63.0% increase. Primary referral sources comprised Magistrates, legal practitioners, parallel services staff, police, custody staff and mental health services. While requests from Magistrates are accorded priority, the service accepts referrals from anyone who has some concern about the mental health of individuals who will be appearing before the Court. CREDIT/Bail Support Program In December 2004 the Magistrates Court, in consultation with the Department of Justice and Corrections Victoria, combined two existing Court bail programs the Court Referral and Evaluation for Drug Treatment Program (CREDIT) and the Bail Support Program (BSP). The CREDIT program was established in 1998, after the Court identified a need to address the escalation of offending due to substance issues. The program targeted defendants arrested for non-violent offences who had a demonstrable drug problem, who were at risk of committing further offences while on bail, who would have normally been released on bail, and/or were suitable for drug treatment. The Court implemented the Bail Support Program in January 2001, with the aim of enhancing the likelihood of a defendant being granted bail and successfully completing the bail period, by providing appropriate links and referrals to Court and community-based support systems through Court-based case management, accommodation, supervision and access to treatment. Merging these programs enables the Court to provide an improved service and therefore enhances the likelihood of defendants being granted bail and successfully completing their bail period by linking them with appropriate accommodation and providing supervision and early access to treatment. This process has been achieved by expanding the eligibility for defendants to access services. In addition, a combined service improves the prospect of defendants successfully meeting their bail conditions by providing structured support and links and creating opportunities for defendants to address substance abuse issues at an early opportunity. The objectives of the CREDIT/Bail Support Program are to: provide early treatment and access to drug treatment/rehabilitation programs; provide access to accommodation, welfare, legal and other community supports; provide clients and the Court with monitoring and support of clients on the program for a period of three to four months; minimise harm to clients and the community by addressing substance abuse issues; and reduce risks of further re-offending. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 53

56 Court Support Services Case Study of Client on CREDIT/Bail Support Program Outcomes of the CREDIT/Bail Support Program Ian referred himself to the CREDIT/ Bail Support Program late in 2004 for support in addressing a 30-year history of drug abuse. Ian had been in and out of custody since the age of 11 and was at the time 49 years of age. In total, Ian had spent 28 years in prison and was extremely institutionalised. Ian was very honest and openly discussed the issues that continued to bring him in contact with the criminal justice system, including drug abuse, homelessness, lack of support, anger and grief. Ian was very keen for support and a number of options were provided to help him successfully complete his bail period, including: supported accommodation and assistance in applying for public housing; referral to a GP for pharmacotherapy treatment; drug and alcohol counselling; employment assistance; travel cards and material aid; an anger management course; and weekly monitoring and support. Ian attended every arranged appointment, accessed pharmacotherapy and medical treatment and began attending weekly support meetings with the CREDIT/Bail Support Coordinator. Ian often stated he was so overwhelmed with the support provided that he felt motivated and encouraged to try harder to achieve positive results in his life. Ian had never had his own home and had never completed public housing applications. As part of the support provided to Ian at this time he was placed on the waiting list for public housing. Ian completed every program organised for him and began addressing issues of unemployment. After completing a hospitality course at age 49, Ian returned to work after more than 20 years out of the workforce. Ian met all of his bail conditions and in February 2005 was sentenced to a Community Based Order. The sentencing Magistrate made reference to Ian s hard work and how well he had embraced the support provided to him. Ian had never completed any program in the 28 years he had spent in and out of custody. Ian resides in a country town, where he has a public housing property and full-time employment. Ian has no other court matters pending and is drug free. In a card received by Ian earlier this year he writes: I can never thank you enough, only through my continued effort to become the person you and your support convinced me I can become. I know I am a rough diamond but still worthwhile. The CREDIT/Bail Support Program aims to achieve the following outcomes: Successful completion of bail by defendants who would otherwise be remanded in custody. Reduction in the number of defendants remanded due to lack of accommodation or treatment/support in the community. Long-term reduction of defendants involved in the criminal justice system. Successful placement of defendants in drug treatment/rehabilitative programs. Statistics During , the Court referred 1,759 defendants to the CREDIT program (1,593 in ) and there were 774 referrals to the Bail Support program, compared with 355 in Location of the CREDIT/Bail Support Program The CREDIT/Bail Support Program is located at Melbourne, Broadmeadows, Sunshine, Dandenong, Ringwood, Heidelberg, Frankston, Geelong and Ballarat Magistrates Courts. Rural Outreach Diversion Workers are located at Moe and Bendigo Magistrates Courts. 54 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

57 Referral to the program can be made via a Magistrate, police, legal representative, court nominee, family or by the client. Clients are required to commit to treatment and attend regular support meetings with their case manager. In Custody Assessments A case manager assesses clients prior to the bail application and a comprehensive treatment/support plan is developed in order to address identified issues. The case manager arranges all community supports and monitors attendance at counselling and other appointments. The case manager submits the plan to a Magistrate for consideration. Case managers remind clients of court dates and submit progress reports to the Court and informants as required. Transitional Housing Properties The CREDIT/Bail Support Program has access to 20 properties in the community, available on a fixed term, to clients of the program. The CREDIT/Bail Support Program contracts the housing support agency Homeground to provide housing support, budgeting, independent living skills and assistance in acquiring longterm housing to clients. Many clients have been successful in seeking full-time employment, due to the stability such housing affords them. Positive Outcomes As illustrated in the case study on page 54, Ian is only one of many very positive outcomes. The CREDIT/Bail Support Program aims to encourage and motivate people to change and improve their quality of life. Clients often lack self esteem and have no one in their lives to encourage them or give positive feedback. Encouragement and positive feedback are key components of this program. Many clients have indicated how differently they see the Court s role after they have been given an opportunity to seek support for the issues that have kept them in the justice system. Community Support Agencies The CREDIT/Bail Support Program has developed very strong links with Government and Non-Government agencies including: Department of Human Services; Victoria Police; Community Health Centres; Legal Aid; Wise Employment; Homeground; St Vincent De Paul; Salvation Army; and Windana and Odyssey. The program could not achieve positive results without the ongoing support of these agencies and the many others that support clients on bail. Most services are provided free to clients. Community Portfolios CREDIT/Bail Support Program case managers are responsible for a community portfolio including: Housing; Women s Resources; Cultural Issues; Police; Training; Material Aid; Rural Resources; and Treatment Programs. Case managers attend a variety of community forums in order to gain further knowledge of support services available to clients of the program. A number of protocols have been established with Wise Employment, Homeground and Centrelink. During the reporting period, a nominee of the CREDIT/Bail Support Program was invited to attend a roundtable forum for the Victorian Law Reform Commission and the Sentencing Advisory Council. In April 2005 the CREDIT/Bail Coordinator spoke at a forum, arranged by the Judicial College of Victoria, on issues relating to clients from the Horn of Africa. This session was designed for Judges and Magistrates and addressed cultural issues, grief and loss, fear, and isolation. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 55

58 Court Support Services The CREDIT/Bail Coordinator has conducted a number of information sessions for Victoria Police members. Issues discussed included referral process, support and treatment options, and monitoring. Future Direction The CREDIT/Bail Support Program will aim to expand its services to rural Victoria, including acquisition of more transitional properties in rural areas. Often clients who have applied for bail in rural Victoria are unable to find accommodation or support and have to move to Melbourne in order to access crisis accommodation and treatment. Representatives of several universities have approached the CREDIT/Bail Support Program requesting placement of students completing justice diplomas and welfare, drug and alcohol diplomas. The universities are very keen for the program to accept students on placement since they consider court experience as invaluable. The program is keen to examine ideas relating to working with students and educating them regarding court processes, client issues and support programs. Criminal Justice Diversion Program The Criminal Justice Diversion Program is provided under section 128A of the Magistrates Court Act 1989 and enables mainly first-time offenders in certain cases to avoid a criminal conviction by instead undertaking various conditions that can benefit the offender, victims and the wider community. The program provides the following advantages: Prevents re-offending by tailoring an order according to the defendant s needs. Enables first-time offenders to avoid a criminal record. Assists the offender's rehabilitation. Utilises community resources for appropriate counselling or treatment. Ensures that appropriate reparation is made to the victim of the offence and, where appropriate, offenders tender an apology to the victim either by letter or in person. Assists local communities through voluntary work and donations. Provides greater flexibility for orders. A Diversion Coordinator monitors cases and conditions, ensuring accountability of the offender. Services Provided A Diversion Coordinator is attached to each Court region and performs the following functions: acts as a central contact for diversion issues and actively promotes the program within the local community; identifies and supports relevant community-based programs within the region; interviews offenders and provides advice to the presiding Magistrate about appropriate links to community services; and monitors the performance of offenders as they complete program conditions. Case Statistics The Program received 7,832 referrals during , representing a 12.3% increase when compared with 6,971 referrals received in The highest number of referrals related to male offenders aged 17 to 25 years. This group represented 43% of referrals received, compared with 44% in Of these offenders, 5,938 were placed on a diversion plan, compared with 5,454 offenders in During , offenders undertook a total of 14,016 conditions, compared with 9,542 in The graph and table on page 57 show a breakdown of the number of conditions undertaken. During , 5,853 offenders successfully undertook conditions and completed their diversion plan, representing 94.3% of offenders who were placed on the program, compared with 4,960 (93.8%) in Community Work Where possible offenders perform community work within their local community or in the area where they committed the offence. During offenders undertook 10,586 hours of community work with a range of non-profit organisations. One of the voluntary organisations involved with the Program, Keep Australia Beautiful Victoria (KABV) agreed to provide links to the community for voluntary work purposes for a fur- 56 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

59 Diversion Plan Orders by Type of Condition Undertaken No Aplogy to Victim Community Work Compensate Victim Counselling/Treatment Alcohol Counselling/Treatment Drug Counselling/Treatment Gambling Counselling/Treatment Other Defensive Drivers Course Donation to Charity/Community Project Letter of Gratitude to Informant Other Offenders may undertake more than one condition as part of their diversion plan Condition Apology to Victim 2,692 2,740 Community Work Compensation to Victim 1,167 1,302 Counselling/Treatment Alcohol Counselling/Treatment Drug Counselling/Treatment Gambling Counselling/Treatment Other Defensive Driving Course/ Road Trauma Workshop Donation 3,811 4,496 Letter of Gratitude/ Apology to Informant 2,341 2,532 Other Note: Offenders may undertake more than one condition as part of their diversion plan. ther 12 months. Since the Diversion Program began KABV has placed 1,272 offenders who have completed over 27,000 hours of voluntary work in their local communities. Donations/Restitution Each year, offenders in the program make donations to local charities or non-profit organisations. During offenders undertook to pay a total of $851,548 in donations to charities and local community projects. A further $681,478 in restitution was undertaken to be paid to victims during Open Family Sporting Intervention Program This pilot project is conducted by Open Family Australia Hume Region with the assistance of Victoria Police, members of the Wangaratta sporting community and the Criminal Justice Diversion Program. The program is facilitated through the Criminal Justice Diversion Program and provides a sentencing option in mainstream Magistrates Court cases. The project aims to integrate young offenders into a sporting association to promote a sense of belonging, a connection with their community, a sense of wellbeing and in doing so aims to promote leadership, motivation and commitment. The project is non-gender specific and targets offenders between the ages It caters for all ethnic groups and sporting abilities. The Criminal Justice Diversion Program has funded the Pilot Project since June Road Trauma Awareness Workshop A joint initiative of the Court and the Road Trauma Support Team, the Road Trauma Awareness Workshop is designed for road traffic offenders. It aims to educate offenders about the impact of road trauma and to create safer drivers. The workshop initially stemmed from the Criminal Justice Diversion Program and is now available as a sentencing option. A Young Offender Project Committee has been formed to assess the potential value of the workshop for implementation in the Children s Court. The Court conducted 34 workshops during the financial year (17 in ) attended by approximately 418 offenders (300 in ). Activities Promoting Community Interest The program promotes community interest through donations and/or community work involving the following projects: Blackwood Youth Foundation assisting kids struggling with mainstream schooling. Boronia Police Ropes Program aiming to break down the barriers between young people and police. City of Greater Geelong Graffiti Strategy. Keep Australia Beautiful, Victoria, providing services to local communities and links to other voluntary organisations Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 57

60 Court Support Services Kicking Goals Youth Program, providing disadvantaged youth with opportunities to attend AFL games. Local Country Fire Authorities, State Emergency Services and Community Health Centres. Local driving skill courses in Moe and East Gippsland. Mt Martha Community House benefiting disadvantaged young people. PENDAP Drug and Alcohol Assessment, including education sessions on the effects of binge drinking and drinking practices. Road Trauma Awareness Course outlining the impact of road accidents. SAM s Cottage in Bairnsdale providing emergency accommodation. SpiritWest Services providing community services to the western suburbs. Sunbury Street Surfer Bus. Typo Station operating a life skills and alternate education program for young men that are experiencing difficulties at school and/or home. Upper Yarra Community Graffiti Removal Program. Western Chances assisting children to gain school scholarship where the family is suffering from financial hardship. Outlook for An evaluation conducted during the year by Health Outcomes International made the following recommendations to improve the program: Further analysis and consultation should be conducted regarding potential duplication between Police Cautioning and the Criminal Justice Diversion Program. It was recommended that options be developed to address any such duplication. There should be an assessment of whether current measures in place to make stakeholders aware of CJDP are sufficient to ensure access for defendants who do not have Legal Aid representation. To address these issues the Court has placed greater emphasis on the separate roles of cautioning and the Diversion program at police recruit lectures and other police information forums. In addition, these presentations aim to encourage initial referrals from Police to capture unrepresented defendants. New pamphlets have been distributed to courts state wide and to community centres with whom defendants without legal representation are likely to make contact. In the Court plans to continue strong involvement of the program in local communities. Consultation will continue with Victoria Police, the Law Institute of Victoria and other stakeholders to assess potential duplication of cautioning and the Criminal Justice Diversion Program. Defendant surveys on program awareness will be conducted to continue improving promotional activities for the program. Disability Coordinator The Disability Coordinator coordinates the provision of services to people with disabilities coming before the Court, particularly in relation to criminal matters, develops appropriate service plans, including links with service providers, and provides reports to assist Magistrates to manage people with a disability within the sentencing process. The Disability Coordinator also advises the Court about disability issues as they affect the Court. This advice assists the Court to develop and implement programs to meet the needs of disabled Court users. Statistics The number of people with disabilities entering the justice system continued to be high. A total of 474 referrals were made to the Disability Coordinator in (466 in ) and as a result of these referrals the Disability Coordinator opened 112 files (109 in ). The Disability Coordinator submitted 15 written reports to the Guardianship List of VCAT, compared with 11 reports in The number of these types of applications has increased, and they have usually related to defendants whose rehabilitation and level of offending would be positively influenced by the appointment of an Administrator or Guardian. The intervention of an Administrator or Guardian often enhances the effectiveness of the sen- 58 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

61 tence of the Court, and can inject a degree of stability into a chaotic antisocial lifestyle. Some of these applications also arise from the Victims of Crimes (VOCAT) jurisdiction, where a mentally ill or intellectually disabled victim may need the assistance of an Administrator to manage any compensation that may have been awarded. Crimes Family Violence Jurisdiction During the Disability Coordinator experienced a significant rise in the number of defendants with disabilities being referred from this jurisdiction. The reason for this result is unclear, but it may be an indication of the number of untreated mentally ill people in the community. Data collected for this financial year revealed that 48 referrals were received from this jurisdiction. While Magistrates referred the majority of matters to the Disability Coordinator, Victoria Police and the legal profession also referred many of these matters. In addition, referrals came from mainstream human services, allied services and a wide cross-section of the community, including: Salvation Army; Major city hospitals; Community Health Services; Melbourne City Council; the Public Advocate; and the Department of Human Services. Enforcement Review Program The Enforcement Review Program (ERP) is a support service of the Court. Launched on 24 June 2002, the ERP assists clients with special circumstances who have outstanding fines registered at the PERIN Court. Special circumstances include an intellectual disability, a diagnosed mental illness, an acquired brain injury or a severe physical disability that impairs the client s judgment. Registered users of the ERP comprise 152 Government and non-government agencies, including mental health services, voluntary and religious groups, funded community services and legal services. The ERP Officer: screens and assesses clients to determine their eligibility for the program; compiles applications for revocation of fines to be determined by PERIN registrars; educates and promotes the ERP to Government and non-government agencies; coordinates the Special Circumstances List and advises defendants of hearings; mediates and negotiates with Sheriffs operations and prosecutors to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the ERP; answers general enquires and makes text entries on the Sheriffs database, alerting users to the special circumstances of clients; records monthly results from the dates of hearing and directs applications made to the ERP; and makes referrals to other services, where appropriate, to achieve continual monitoring of the ERP. Statistics During , the ERP office received and forwarded 544 applications to revoke fines under the special circumstances category to PERIN Court for determination. This result compares with 502 applications during , representing an 8% increase. The 544 applications encompassed 5,880 PERIN Court warrants and 1,637 PERIN Court orders, totalling $1,786, in fines and costs. In , 502 applications received equated to $1,484, in fines and costs. Since ERP was introduced in 2002, the PERIN Court has revoked $4,224,978 in PERIN Court warrants and orders and listed these matters for a special circumstance hearing. The hearings included applications received via the ERP office and those received directly at the PERIN Court. To enable applications to be processed, the Court lists hearing dates twice a month, with two sessions conducted at a.m. and 2.00 p.m. During , 712 people attended the Special Circumstances List, compared with 637 in , representing an 11.7% increase. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 59

62 Court Support Services Program Expansion In October 2004, staff in the Criminal Justice Diversion Program and the Enforcement Review Program at the Melbourne Magistrates Court merged to provide a more efficient service and an improved skill base for both programs. An internal evaluation was carried out to assess the value of expanding the Program to rural Victoria through Diversion Coordinators or existing Court staff. Evaluation results indicated that expanding the Program would be a positive step for the Court. However, the Court will await the recommendations of the Department of Justice Infringement Review Project before undertaking consultation with stakeholders and implementation of any changes to the operation of the ERP. Consultations The ERP Officer held approximately 16 workshops, seminars and staff meetings (20 in ) for representatives of outreach services, community organisations, legal services, financial counselling services and Government departments. The ERP Officer was invited to appear before the Victorian Parliamentary Law Reform Committee PERIN Forum. The forum considered reforms to PERIN warrants and ways to reduce the volume of cases that proceed to warrant. The ERP Officer participated in the Public Transport Enforcement Forum Working Group. The group was established to provide an opportunity for representatives of disadvantaged groups to meet with enforcement representatives of the Department of Infrastructure to discuss public transport enforcement issues. Juvenile Justice Melbourne Central Courts Unit (Adult Court Advice Service) The Juvenile Justice Court Unit was established at the Melbourne Magistrates Court in January The service specifically focuses on young people between the ages of 17 and 20 years of age who are appearing before the Court in relation to criminal matters. The Unit provides the following services: Comprehensive pre-sentence assessment reports for young offenders where the Court is considering a Youth Training Centre (YTC) Order. Comprehensive case management for young people subject to bail or a deferral of sentencing. Supervision, support and counselling for young people on bail or on deferrals, incorporating referrals to appropriate agencies for accommodation, drug treatment, psychological/psychiatric and other associated support agencies. Liaison with judicial officers, legal and Court personnel and other Court services staff to develop the most appropriate approach for young people. Comprehensive reports to the Court at the end of a young person s bail or deferral period. Assistance to identify appropriate diversionary strategies for young offenders. Information for key stakeholders regarding young people who are undergoing a YTC sentence specifically in relation to: their progress at the YTC; parole eligibility date and remission dates; and the potential impact of a concurrent or cumulative sentence upon the overall sentence. Following on from its success, the Unit expanded the Adult Court Advice Service state wide in 2001 to all Victorian adult courts. The Juvenile Justice Adult Court Advice Service is provided by the Department of Human Services. 60 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

63 Community Engagement The Court actively participates in community programs throughout Victoria. Magistrates and registrars lend their specialised expertise by giving presentations, sitting on various boards and tribunals and donating their time to worthwhile community projects, as follows: Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (VOCAT) The Court appoints all Magistrates as members of VOCAT and, along with specially trained Court staff, they assist in providing financial aid to victims of crime so they may recover from their ordeals, while acknowledging the suffering they experienced. Adult Parole Board A Magistrate sits regularly as a board member involved in the release of prisoners on parole, providing a framework that enables prisoners to undertake a step-bystep re-entry into the community. Judicial College of Victoria The Judicial College of Victoria offers a comprehensive range of educational services to assist in the professional development of judicial officers. Chief Magistrate Ian Gray serves as board member of the College and Deputy Chief Magistrate Peter Lauritsen acts as member of the College s educational advisory committee. They and other Magistrates offer their skills and experience in developing various educational initiatives. Ngarra Jarra Indigenous Garden Project. Ngarra Jarra Indigenous Garden Project As part of its commitment to a culturally diverse community, the Court assisted in the development of the Ngarra Jarra Indigenous Garden located at the Parkville Youth Residential Centre (PYRC). The centre provides culturally relevant rehabilitative programs for young women aged 10 to 21 and boys aged 10 to 14 involved in Victoria s Juvenile Justice System. The Wurundjeri people are the traditional owners of the land used for the garden. Ngarra Jarra is a Wurundjeri term meaning healing place. The garden includes coastal plants, a dam, waterfall, grassland area, windmill and dreamtime area. The garden provides young people with a place for quiet reflection, meeting with family, elders and significant others, and participating in programs. Indigenous young people participate in Koori art classes, painting traditional designs and messages about the importance of love and respect on rocks within the garden. The Indigenous Garden Project benefited from the expertise and support of the Wurrundjeri People and Elders, People and Elders of the Kulin Nation, and the significant financial contribution of Whitelion Inc., Craig Eldridge Designs, R E Ross Trust, City West Water and the Court. Information Day for Sudanese Community In October 2004 staff at the Ringwood Court held an information day to help demystify court processes for members of the Sudanese community. The information session was presented to 33 members of the Sudanese Community. Senior Registrar Barry Johnstone arranged a tour of the court with guest speakers, including Magistrates, police and representatives from the Victorian Civil and Administrative Appeal Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 61

64 Community Engagement Deputy Chief Magistrate Dan Muling on a bike ride for charity. Tribunal, followed by refreshments. Speakers explained how the court system worked and how courts and police could help with issues such as landlord and tenant disputes and family violence. Feedback about the session was very positive. Keep Australia Beautiful, Victoria Provides services to local communities and links to other voluntary organisations, including graffiti management programs. Road Trauma Awareness Workshops Designed to educate road traffic offenders about the impact of road trauma and to create safer drivers. Information Day for Sudanese Community. Family Violence Programs and Services Magistrates communicate with agencies involved with parts of the Family Violence and Family Law jurisdiction of the Court and maintain links with local family violence services and support networks. In addition, the Court directs youth and victims of domestic violence to agencies offering emergency relief and accommodation. Information Programs In conjunction with local councils and relevant agencies, the Court regularly conducts community education and information programs regarding various aspects of the Court, such as VOCAT, Crimes Family Violence, Koori Court and Aboriginal liaison. The Court holds community education and information programs and seminars, such as Road Safe and Driver Education Programs and Alcohol and Drug Awareness Programs, and conducts education and information seminars regarding Mental Health issues. In November 2004 Magistrates at the Broadmeadows Court, together with the Community Policing Unit, participated in an information session with the Somalian Community. School Programs The Court conducts school programs, including court visits by school groups, talks to school students by registrars, moot courts and providing work experience for students. In addition, the Court carries out programs to assist schools and their students located in disadvantaged areas. Overseas Visitors The Court hosts visits for overseas and interstate Magistrates, judges and other personnel seeking information about the Court s programs and procedures. Magistrates from Fiji visited Broadmeadows Court on two occasions during to observe the Court in operation. The visits were organised as part of an Australian Government AusAid Program. 62 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

65 (Left) Onsidesoccer competitors; (Right) Acting Magistrate Brian Barrow congratulates players at the final of the All Nations Onsidesoccer competition in August NAIDOC Week Celebrated On 7 July 2004 the Melbourne Court hosted a lunch of traditional Aboriginal fare to celebrate National Aboriginal Islander Day Observance Committee (NAIDOC) Week. A number of Magistrates, Court staff and Aboriginal Elders attended the event and enjoyed traditional Aboriginal dancing and food. Aboriginal Elders Aunty Joy Murphy, Aunty Kitty McCormack and Aunty Joanne Holmes spoke on behalf of their communities and gave presentations about their work in the Aboriginal community. The 2005 NAIDOC theme Our Future begins with Solidarity, aimed to promote a sense of unity between Indigenous people and the wider Australian community. Onsidesoccer The Court has been involved with Onsidesoccer since it was established in The program is dedicated to providing positive sporting opportunities for young men and women from new arrival and refugee backgrounds. Onsidesoccer uses soccer as a tool for personal development and social integration, and as a means of improving the physical and mental health of participants. The Onsidesoccer Committee comprises representatives from the Magistrates Court, Victoria Police, Centre for Multicultural Youth Issues, Wise Employment, the Victorian Soccer Federation and the Criminal Law section of the Law Institute of Victoria. Two ongoing metropolitan competitions involve more than 200 young men from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds. The competition and subsequent program has been named the All Nations competition. The final of the All Nations competition was played at the Bob Jane Soccer Stadium in South Melbourne on 14 August 2004 between a Vietnamese team from the north-western suburbs and a Sudanese team from the southeastern suburbs. The spirited game was played before a small but enthusiastic audience from the Vietnamese and Sudanese communities. Onsidesoccer has engaged the Victorian soccer Federation, other State sporting organisations and local government to advocate for the needs of young men and women from culturally-diverse backgrounds. As a result sporting facilities have been secured, some on a permanent basis, for community use. Onsidesoccer has assisted many of the competing teams to form relationships with local soccer clubs and has also assisted the various communities supporting young men participating in the competition to link with State and Local government agencies, community support networks, the Victorian Soccer Federation, Volleyball Victoria and local sporting clubs. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 63

66 Serving the Court s Users Information Technology The Technology Support Group provides information technology (IT) support for the Court. This group is responsible for ensuring technology services are delivered in a timely and efficient manner. Court Infrastructure Strategy The Court s Infrastructure Strategy developed in was implemented during The highlights of the strategy were as follows: Windows XP was deployed to all 900 PCs in the Court s computer fleet across 52 sites. The first stage of network bandwidth upgrades were completed as a precursor to a whole of Victorian Government bandwidth upgrade, which is expected to be rolled out by September The Technology Support Group undertook an application server consolidation and migration. This task was completed over many months with careful planning and user testing. As a result, all servers supporting the Court include the latest operating system on current hardware. IT facilities were set up at new Court complexes in Mildura and Warrnambool. The IT Group deployed a Client Management System to the Koori Court/Aboriginal Liaison Officer. The system, which became operational in February 2005, is being used at Broadmeadows, Warrnambool, Shepparton and Melbourne with further expansion expected in the next financial year. Telecommunications The Court s telephone system was further enhanced during by additional reporting facilities being provided to the Court. In addition the Court undertook a security audit of the PABX at Melbourne Magistrates Court. Digital Audio Recording The Digital Audio Recording pilot program was extended with the XP rollout, providing the opportunity to enhance the audio recording system. The system will be rolled out to the Melbourne Magistrates Court in July Courtlink The Court s case management system Courtlink continued to achieve a 99% availability rating during Courtlink was enhanced in response to the following legislative and procedural changes: Magistrates Court (Family Violence) Act 2004 changes were made to accommodate the commencement of Family Violence Court Divisions at Heidelberg and Ballarat. Sex Offenders Registration Act 2004 and Regulations the Criminal system was enhanced to accommodate identification of relevant offences, a new order code and additional forms. Customs Legislation Amendment (Airport, Port and Cargo Security) Act 2004 additional bail conditions were made available in the criminal system. Amendment to Confiscation Act 1987 a new Criminal application code was introduced. Monetary Units Act 2004 changes to accommodate the calculation of new penalty unit provisions. Magistrates Court Civil Procedure (Amendment No. 11) Rules 2004 addition of new document and initiation details. Amendment of Magistrates Court Schedule regarding the disposal and retention of files changes to reports in Civil and Crimes Family Violence to identify relevant files. Criminal Justice Enhancement Project (CJEP) Courtlink continued working with CJEP agencies, including the County Court, Corrections Victoria and Victoria Police, in relation to the transmission of information. The proof of concept to provide a Graphical User Interface (GUI) for Magistrates orders in Courtlink was successfully completed. Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS) During the financial year the Technology Support Group continued to provide support to the Integrated Courts Management System (ICMS) project, which commenced during The primary focus of the project for the Court is to replace Courtlink and provide a single case management system for all jurisdictions and to enhance access to the Court using technology, specifically video conferencing and e-trial facilities. The ICMS program is expected to take four years to complete. Video Conferencing Service The Court has been a leader in video conferencing technology, enabling Court users, including witnesses, offenders in custody and victims, to appear via video link without the need to attend court in person. Since it was first introduced in 1997 acceptance and use of video conferencing in court proceedings has grown. 64 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

67 In the number of matters where a video link was used at the Melbourne Magistrates Court increased slightly, totalling 1,058 matters heard via video link, compared with 1,030 matters during Court Library The Court s library holds a collection of journals, law reports, legislation, textbooks, annual reports and a range of loose-leaf legal services in hard copy. Information resources are available in both print and electronic formats. The library s central collection is located at Melbourne and courthouses around the State hold numerous smaller collections. During the financial year the Judicial Officers Information Network (JOIN) was implemented. JOIN is a collaborative project between the Judicial College of Victoria and the Department of Justice, with the support of all jurisdictions. JOIN is an intranet service available to judicial officers and Court personnel who support judicial officers and provides extensive subscriptions to commercial information services providers, including Lexis/Nexis, Lawlex, Anstat and Thomson Lawbook. In addition JOIN enables users to access a variety of bench books including The Bail Digest, Family Violence and Stalking Protocols, Magistrates Court Bench Book, the Search Warrants Manual and the VOCAT Handbook. Links are provided for Practice Directions and online journals for all jurisdictions. During the reporting year a review was conducted of the Magistrates Court Library resourcing capacity. The review was conducted in March 2005 with a final report presented in May The recommendations of the review will be considered in future planning. Court Safety and Security The Court developed a standard evacuation placard template and circulated it to all Court locations. The placards include ready reference information that Court staff and users can easily access in the event of an emergency. In addition, staff at courts provided input into developing individual site evacuation placards. As at 30 June 2005, the Court had distributed 95% of these individualised placards. As a means of ensuring the safety of Court staff, the Court considered the risks associated with after-hours court safety and security and engaged commercial security organisations to respond to after-hours alarm activations. In consultation with the Court Security Committee and a leading behavioural psychologist, the Court developed a one-day safety and security workshop Managing Potentially Violent Clients. This training program continued to operate throughout the year. During , more than 47 court staff participated in four workshops. The program will continue in Court Safety and Security Master Plan To ensure Court personnel safety and security remains current within a continually-changing environment, the Court reviewed and updated the 2001 Courts Safety and Security Master Plan, which will be ratified early in The Court distributed the Safety Security and Emergency Action Handbook for Victorian Courts and VCAT to court locations across Victoria in To ensure Court staff appropriately use and familiarise themselves with the information provided in the handbook, the Court Security Manager visited all jurisdictions in Victoria during Familiarisation training in duress and emergency procedures will continue for all Court staff. Court Security Committee The Court Security Manager chairs the Court Security Committee, which includes representatives from each court, VCAT, the Department of Justice, contract security providers, Victoria Police, the Department of Education and Training, the Emergency and Security Management Unit and Corrections Victoria. The Committee meets monthly and is involved in most of the planning and development of staff safety and security projects. During the Committee achieved effective outcomes for all Court personnel, including: improved support from Victoria Police to coordinate protective service officers deployed to Court locations; immediate advice and support available for Court staff and members of the judiciary; improved information flow among the members of the judiciary, Court staff in all jurisdictions and Victoria Police intelligence; and improved protocols with Victoria Police to establish secure court locations. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 65

68 Financial Statements for the Year Ended 30 June Note Budget Actual Budget Actual SPECIAL APPROPRIATIONS Magistrates Salaries and Allowances 20,329,400 20,509,622 19,961,000 20,845,074 Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal Operating expenses 1,723,000 1,713,751 1,753,000 1,756,265 Compensation payments 27,000,000 27,227,845 25,600,000 29,106,115 Total Special Appropriations 49,052,400 49,578,187 47,314,000 51,707,454 RECURRENT APPROPRIATIONS Salaries, Overtime and Annual Leave 13,858,200 13,892,439 12,490,100 12,246,168 Superannuation 1,341,100 1,348,102 1,211,939 1,264,771 Payroll Taxation 816, , , ,059 Fringe Benefits Taxation 33,000 34,039 5,000 36,051 Provision for Long Service Leave 542, , , ,015 Work Cover Levy 198, ,508 Work Cover 1,228-1,130 Total Salaries and Associated Expenditure 16,790,100 16,777,696 14,930,339 14,785,194 OPERATING EXPENDITURE Travel and Personal Expenses 759, , , ,040 Printing, Stationery and Subscriptions 1,015,400 1,064, ,100 1,015,144 Postage and Communication 728, , , ,417 Contractors and Professional Services 151, , , ,281 Consultants Training and Development 76,500 85,532 75,300 91,960 Motor Vehicle Expenses 499, , , ,986 Operating Expenses 613, , , ,881 Jury, Witness and Award Payments 125, , , ,750 Information Technology Costs 200, , , ,213 Urgent and Essentials 220, , , ,013 Rent and Property Services 933, , , ,511 Property Utilities 597, , , ,746 Repairs and Maintenance 295, , , ,486 Finance Lease Interest 86,200 76, Court Security Project 0 25, Bank Fees 0 28, Total Operating Expenditure 6,300,800 6,185,648 5,525,300 6,235,428 Total Salaries and Operating Expenditure 23,090,900 22,963,344 20,455,639 21,020,622 REVENUE RETENTION INITIATIVES Shortfall in Operating Expenses 3 500, , , ,102 Security and Engineering Services 3 310, , , ,621 Education and Training of Magistrates 3 150, , , ,787 Upgrade of Telephony Systems 3-8,583 Total Revenue Retention Expenditure 960, ,280 1,000,000 1,024, Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

69 Note Budget Actual Budget Actual PARALLEL PROGRAMS Court Diversion Pilot Project 6 1,026, , , ,535 Bail Coordinator 6 621, ,630 - (4,155) CREDIT 6 955, ,325 1,059, ,861 Drug Court 6 1,041,700 1,002,236 1,073, ,834 Aboriginal Liaison Officer 6 85,800 86,858 80,000 56,915 Koori Court 6 346, , , ,282 Family Violence Division 6 325, , Major Trials 364, , Total Parallel Programs Expenditure 4,766,800 4,628,574 3,311,661 3,003,272 Total Recurrent Expenditure 5 28,817,700 28,542,198 24,767,300 25,047,987 DEPARTMENTAL CONTROLLED EXPENDITURE - 6,155 Corporate Card Fees Essential Services Maintenance 1, 7 443, , Work Cover Levy 1 98, ,439 Rental Accommodation 1 2,042,000 2,047,095 1,805,200 1,771,959 Government Finance Charge 1, 4 9,960,400 9,960,335 9,333,600 9,313,555 Depreciation Land and Buildings 1, 2 2,513,400 3,194,600 2,051,000 2,555,862 Amortisation Land and Buildings 1, 2 303, , , ,816 Amortisation Motor Vehicles 1, 2 246, , Depreciation Plant and Equipment 1, 2 1,432, ,890 1,102, ,688 Total Department Controlled Expenditure 16,942,000 16,815,501 14,703,600 14,822,882 CAPITAL EXPENDITURE Purchases of Plant and Equipment 0 72, , ,573 Major Trials 1,160, , Total Works and Services 1,160, , , ,573 Notes to and forming part of the Financial Statement Note 1 Items identified as departmental controlled expenditure are fully funded for the financial year. Any surplus or deficit outcome for the financial year has no impact on the Court s recurrent budget. Any budget savings achieved in these expenditure items cannot be redeployed to meet other general expenses. Note 2 Depreciation is the process of allocating the value of all non-current physical assets controlled by the Court over their useful life, having regard to any residual value remaining at the end of the assets economic life. Financial Management makes this charge on a monthly basis as part of the end-of-month process. Depreciation charges are based on the value of each individual asset, the method of depreciation used for each asset, the specified rate of depreciation and the physical location of the asset. Note 3 Included in operating expenses are retained court fees for one-off capital expenditure initiatives, which were approved during the financial year. Note 4 The Capital Asset Charge is a charge made by the Department of Treasury and Finance (DTF) as a measure of the cost of capital that entities have invested in assets under their control. Currently, DTF sends a monthly invoice to Finance for payment. Since the Court has no control over funding allocated any surplus or deficit at the financial year s end does not affect the Court s budget. Note 5 A budget surplus of $275,502 was achieved in the recurrent budget for Note 6 The Court has several parallel programs that have been incorporated into its operations. Although these programs are funded individually, the overall annual funding forms part of the total annual recurrent funding of the Court. Note 7 The Department of Justice contracted Urban Maintenance Systems in December 2004 to maintain the essential services within departmental buildings. The Magistrates Court (including the Children s Court) were allocated $700,000 for the year to ensure that all essential services in court buildings are compliant with the Essential Services Legislation. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 67

70 Directory of the Magistracy of Victoria The Magistrates and Coroners of the State of Victoria as at 30 June 2005 were as follows: Chief Magistrate Mr Ian Leslie Gray Deputy Chief Magistrates Mr Paul Douglas Grant Mr Peter Henry Lauritsen Mr Daniel John Muling Ms Jelena Popovic Mr Paul Anthony Smith State Coordinating Magistrate Mr Paul Anthony Smith State Coroner Mr Graeme Douglas Johnstone Deputy State Coroner Mr Iain Treloar West Regional Coordinating Magistrates Ms Angela Joy Bolger Mr Bernard Joseph Coburn Ms Jillian Mary Crowe Mr John William Doherty Mr John Philip Dugdale Mr William Paterson Gibb Mr Robert Krishnan Ashok Kumar Ms Kay Helen Macpherson Mr Lance Ivan Martin Ms Christine Anne Stewart-Thornton Mr Ian Maxwell von Einem Supervising Magistrates Ms Jennifer Anne Benn Goldsbrough (Crimes Family Violence) Mr Paul Douglas Grant DCM (Koori Court) Ms Lisa Anne Hannan (Criminal) Mr Peter Henry Lauritsen DCM (Civil) Mr Daniel John Muling DCM (Information Technology) Ms Felicity Anne Broughton (VOCAT from 1 July 2004 to 31 December 2004) Ms Susan Melissa Wakeling (VOCAT from 1 January 2005) Magistrates Mr Henry Clive Alsop Ms Donna Bakos Mr Raffaele Barberio Mr Thomas Arthur Dent Barrett Mr Edwin Charles Batt Mr Maxwell Charles Speedie Beck Mr Isaac Joseph Beder Mr Ross Frederick Betts Mrs Susan Adele Blashki Ms Jennifer Carolyn Anne Bowles Mr Barry Bernard Braun Mr Leonard Harold Brear Ms Felicity Anne Broughton Mr Andrew Thomas Capell Mr James Maxwell Brooke Cashmore Mr Brian Joseph Clifford Mr Michael Patrick Coghlan Ms Ann Elizabeth Collins Ms Barbara Ann Cotterell Mr David Bruce Sidney Cottrill Mr Peter Couzens Mr Rodney Leslie Crisp Ms Caitlin Creed English Mr Julian Francis Fitz-Gerald Ms Lesley Ann Fleming Mr Roger Wilson Franich Mr Phillip Goldberg Ms Jennifer Margaret Grubissa Mr Maurice Gurvich Mr Harold Rupert Hallenstein AM Mr Harley James Harber Ms Margaret Gill Harding Mr John William Hardy Mr Thomas Kevin Hassard Ms Kate Isabella Hawkins Ms Jacinta Mary Heffey Mr Louis Joseph Hill Mr Francis Ross Hodgens Ms Audrey Graham Jamieson Mr Frank William Dudley Jones Mr Jonathan George Klestadt Ms Elizabeth Anne Lambden Ms Catherine Frances Lamble Mr Nunzio La Rosa Mr Gregory John Zalman Levine Mr Timothy John McDonald Mr Ian Thomas McGrane Mr Rowan George McIndoe Mr Gregory Lawrence McNamara Mr Clive James McPherson Mr Reginald John Marron Ms Anne Jeanette Maughan Mr Peter Harry Mealy Mr John Martin Murphy Mr William John George O Day Mr Thomas Michael O Dwyer Ms Denise Mary O Reilly Ms Kim Michelle Willmott Parkinson Ms Jane Marie Josephine Patrick Mr Peter Thomas Power Mr Steven Raleigh Mr Peter Anthony Reardon Mr Duncan Keith Reynolds Ms Mary Kay Robertson Mr Charles Schol Rozencwajg Mr Ronald Norman Saines Mr Michael Leslie Smith Ms Paresa Antoniadis Spanos Mr Alan John Spillane Ms Heather Margaret Spooner Mr Michael Henry Lewis Stone Ms Noreen Mary Toohey Mr Robert Leslie Tuppen Ms Belinda Jane Wallington Mr Hugh Malcolm Walter Mr William Peter White Mr Brian Robert Wright Mr Richard Thomas Wright Mr Brian Philip Wynn-Mackenzie Acting Magistrates Mr Brian Stirtevant Barrow Mr John Douglas Bolster Mr Lewis Phillip Byrne Mr Barry Francis Docking Mr William Desmond Martin Mr James Stanislaus Mornane Mr Philip John Rodda Mr Terry John Wilson Mr Lionel Cedric Winton-Smith 68 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

71 Court Locations Metropolitan Courts Melbourne 233 William Street, GPO Box 882G, Melbourne 3001 Tel: Committal Coordinator Fax: ; Criminal Coordinator Fax: Criminal Registry Fax: ; Civil Coordinator Fax: Pre-hearing Conference Fax: ; Civil Registry Fax: Family Law Fax: ; Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal Fax: Broadmeadows Cnr Pearcedale Pde and Dimboola Rd, PO Box 3235, Broadmeadows 3047 Tel: Fax: Dandenong Cnr Foster and Pultney Streets, PO Box 392, Dandenong 3175 Tel: Criminal Fax: Civil Fax: Frankston Fletcher Road, PO Box 316, Frankston 3199 Tel: Fax: Heidelberg Jika Street, PO Box 105, Heidelberg 3084 Tel: Fax: Moonee Ponds Kellaway Avenue, Moonee Ponds 3039 PO Box 3235, Broadmeadows 3047 Tel: Fax Preston Cnr Roseberry Avenue and Kelvin Grove, PO Box 268, Preston 3072 Tel: Fax: Ringwood Ringwood Street, PO Box 333, Ringwood 3134 Tel: Fax Sunshine 10 Foundry Rd, PO Box 435, Sunshine 3020 Tel: Fax: Werribee Cnr Duncans Road and Salisbury Street, PO Box 196, Werribee 3030 Tel: Fax PERIN Court Level 7, 436 Lonsdale Street, Melbourne 3000 Tel Fax P.O. Box 14487, Melbourne 8001 Country Courts Ararat Cnr Barkly and Ingor Streets, PO Box 86, Ararat 3377 Tel: Fax: Bacchus Marsh Main Street, PO Box 277, Bacchus Marsh 3340 Tel: Fax: Bairnsdale Nicholson Street, PO Box 367, Bairnsdale 3875 Tel: Fax: Ballarat 100 Grenville Street South, PO Box 604, Ballarat 3350 Tel: Fax: Benalla Bridge Street, PO Box 258, Benalla 3672 Tel: Fax: Bendigo 71 Pall Mall, PO Box 930, Bendigo 3550 Tel: Fax: Castlemaine Lyttleton Street, PO Box 92, Castlemaine 3450 Tel: Fax: Cobram Cnr Punt Road and High Street, Box 607, Shepparton 3630 Tel: Fax: Colac Queen Street, PO Box 200, Colac 3250 Tel: Fax: Corryong Jardine Street, Box 50, Wodonga 3690 Tel: (02) (Wodonga) Dromana Codrington Street, PO Box 105, Dromana 3936 Tel: Fax: Echuca Heygarth Street, PO Box 76, Echuca 3564 Tel: Fax: Edenhope Shire Offices, West Wimmera Shire Counsel 49 Elizabeth Street, Edenhope 3318 Box 111, Horsham 3400 Tel: (Horsham Court) Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 69

72 Court Locations Geelong Railway Terrace, PO Box 428, Geelong 3213 Tel: Fax: Hamilton Martin Street, PO Box 422, Hamilton 3300 Tel: Fax: Hopetoun Shire Offices, Shire of Karkarooc, 75 Lascelles Street Box 111, Horsham 3400 Tel: (Horsham Court) Horsham Roberts Ave, PO Box 111, Horsham 3400 Tel: Fax: Kerang Victoria Street, PO Box 77, Kerang 3579 Tel: Fax: Korumburra Bridge Street, PO Box 211, Korumburra 3950 Tel: Fax: Kyneton Hutton Street, PO Box 20, Kyneton 3444 Tel: Fax: Mansfield Cnr High and Highett Street, PO Box 105, Mansfield 3722 Tel: Fax: Maryborough Clarendon Street, PO Box 45, Maryborough 3465 Tel: Fax: Mildura 56 Deakin Avenue, PO Box 5014, Mildura 3500 Tel: Fax: Moe Lloyd Street, PO Box 87, Moe 3825 Tel: Fax: Myrtleford Myrtle Street, Myrtleford 3737 Tel: Fax: Nhill 110 MacTelerson Street, PO Box 8, Nhill 3418 Tel: Omeo Shire Offices, Main Street, Omeo 3898, Box 367, Bairnsdale 3875 Orbost Wolsley Street, Orbost 3888, Box 367, Bairnsdale 3875 Tel: (Court days only) Ouyen Shire Offices, Oke Street, Ouyen 3490, PO Box 5014, Mildura 3500 Tel: (Mildura Court) Portland 67 Cliff Street, PO Box 374, Portland 3305 Tel: Fax: Robinvale George Street Robinvale 3549, Box 5014, Mildura 3500 Tel: Sale Foster Street (Princess Highway) PO Box 351, Sale 3850 Tel: Fax: Seymour Tallarook Street, PO Box 235, Seymour 3660 Tel: Fax: Shepparton High Street, PO Box 607, Shepparton 3630 Tel: Fax: St Arnaud Napier Street, St Arnaud 3478, PO Box 111, Horsham 3400 Tel: Stawell Patrick Street, PO Box 179, Stawell 3380 Tel: Swan Hill Curlewis Street, PO Box 512, Swan Hill 3585 Tel: Fax: Wangaratta Faithful Street, PO Box 504, Wangaratta 3677 Tel: Fax: Warrnambool 218 Koroit Street, PO Box 244, Warrnambool 3280 Tel: Fax: Wodonga 5 Elgin Boulevard, PO Box 50, Wodonga 3690 Tel: (02) Fax: (02) Wonthaggi Watt Street, PO Box 104, Wonthaggi 3995 Tel: Fax: Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

73 Building Maintenance and Construction The Court oversees the management of 53 courthouses throughout Victoria. These facilities include Magistrates Court facilities, the State Coroner s Office and the Children s Court. The Department of Justice owns 45 courthouses, four locations are under commercial leasing agreements and the remaining four are Shire offices used on a periodical basis. During the Court undertook the following capital works projects: Warrnambool Court Complex A new four-court multi-jurisdictional complex at Warrnambool adjacent to the existing police station was completed. On 10 February 2005 the Attorney-General officially opened the complex. Prior to its official opening a public open day was held and was well attended. Mildura Court Complex A new four-court multi-jurisdictional complex at Mildura was completed and commenced operations on 25 October On 23 November 2004 the Attorney-General officially opened the complex. Prior to its official opening a community open day attracted in excess of 1,500 local residents. Latrobe Valley Court and Police Complex Construction began on a new court complex in Morwell, which will colocate courts, police, sheriffs and corrections. With a budget of $37.2 million, the project is due for completion in September Moorabbin Court Complex Site selection and purchase of a new sixcourt Magistrates Court facility was completed and design work commenced during the financial year. The project has a budget of $28.2 million. Construction is scheduled to commence in February 2006 and is due for completion in December Minor Works During the Court undertook 41 maintenance and minor works projects, including improvements to security, accommodation and facilities at a number of court locations. Urgent and Essential Works The court undertook 682 urgent and essential work orders at a cost of $222,424. This result compares with when 593 work orders were completed at a total cost of $168,115. Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report 71

74 Web Site Information The Court s web site, located at provides updated daily court lists and information about the Court s jurisdiction, structure and services, legislation, practice and procedure. In addition, the web site offers links to a variety of government, judicial and legal web sites. Related links to web sites include: State Coroner s Office at Children s Court of Victoria at Victims of Crime Assistance Tribunal (VOCAT) at Visitation During , the number of visitors to the Court s web site increased by 22.2%, attracting an average of 22,000 hits per day (18,000 in ). 72 Magistrates Court of Victoria Annual Report

75 Map of Hearing Locations Magistrates' Court Regions Melbourne Ballarat Headquarters Court: Ballarat Other Courts: Ararat, Casterton, Edenhope, Hamilton, Hopetoun, Horsham, Maryborough, Nhill, Portland, St. Arnaud, Stawell, Warrnambool. Bendigo Headquarters Court: Bendigo Other Courts: Echuca, Kerang, Mildura, Ouyen, Robinvale, Swan Hill. Broadmeadows Headquarters Court: Broadmeadows Other Courts: Castlemaine, Kyneton, Moonee Ponds. Dandenong Frankston Headquarters Court: Frankston Other Court: Dromana Geelong Headquarters Court: Geelong Other Court: Colac Heidelberg Headquarters Court: Heidelberg Other Court: Preston. Moe Headquarters Court: Moe Other Court: Bairnsdale, Korumburra, Morwell, Omeo, Orbost, Sale, Wonthaggi. Ringwood Shepparton Headquarters Court: Shepparton Other Courts: Benalla, Cobram, Corryong, Mansfield, Myrtleford, Seymour, Wangaratta, Wodonga. Sunshine Headquarters Court: Sunshine Other Courts: Bacchus Marsh, Werribee. Mildura Robinvale Broadmeadows Sunshine Heidelberg Ringwood Melbourne Dandenong Ouyen Swan Hill Frankston Hopetoun Kerang Cobram Echuca Wodonga Corryong Portland Nhill Casterton Edenhope Horsham Hamilton Maryborough Stawell Ararat Ballarat Warrnambool St Arnaud Colac Werribee Geelong Bendigo Shepparton Seymour Castlemaine Kyneton Dromana Bacchus Marsh Melbourne Benalla Wangaratta Myrtleford Mansfield Moe Korumburra Morwell Sale Omeo Orbost Bairnsdale Wonthaggi

76 Magistrates participate actively in their local communities, including (from left) Magistrates and staff participating in a bike ride for charity, an information day for the Sudanese Community and Onsidesoccer. M a g i s t r a t e s C o u r t o f V i c t o r i a A n n u a l R e p o r t Magistrates Court of Victoria 233 Willilam Street Melbourne, Victoria 3000 Telephone: