2 - Family Court of Australia

Transcription

2
OVERVIEW OF
THE COURT
OVERVIEW OF THE COURT
2
Overview of the Court
About the Court
The Family Court of Australia, through its specialist judges and staff, helps Australians to resolve
their most complex family disputes.
The Family Court of Australia is a superior court of record established by Parliament in 1975
under Chapter III of the Constitution. It commenced operations on 5 January 1976 and consists
of a Chief Justice, a Deputy Chief Justice and other judges. The Court maintains registries in all
Australian states and territories except Western Australia.
Goal
The Court’s goal is to deliver excellence in service for children, families and parties through effective
judicial and non-judicial processes and high-quality and timely judgments, while respecting the
needs of separating families.
Purpose
The purpose of the Court, as Australia’s superior court in family law, is to:
−− determine cases with the most complex law, facts and parties
−− cover specialised areas in family law, and
−− provide national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.
The core services of the Court are those that:
−− are prescribed by legislation
−− enable and support judges to determine cases, and
−− meet duty of care requirements.
Vision
The Court’s vision provides for:
−− putting children and families first in the design and delivery of services
−− furthering functional family relationships after separation
−− ensuring independence and impartiality in the judicial process
−− having staff who are valued for providing quality service for families
−− providing quality child dispute services for families, and
−− being at the forefront of the development of services.
10 FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
The Family Court of Australia is a superior court of record and deals with more complex matters.
These may include, for example:
−− Parenting cases including those that involve a child welfare agency and/or allegations of
sexual abuse or serious physical abuse of a child (Magellan cases); family violence and/
or mental health issues with other complexities; multiple parties; complex cases where
orders sought would have the effect of preventing a parent from communicating with or
spending time with a child; multiple expert witnesses; complex questions of law and/or
special jurisdictional issues; international child abduction under the Hague Convention;
special medical procedures; and/or international relocation.
−− Financial cases that involve multiple parties, valuation of complex interests in trust or corporate
structures, including minority interests, multiple expert witnesses, complex questions of law
and/or jurisdictional issues (including accrued jurisdiction) or complex issues concerning
superannuation (such as complex valuations of defined benefit superannuation schemes).
The Court also has original jurisdiction under certain Commonwealth Acts, including the:
−− Marriage Act 1961
−− Child Support (Registration and Collection) Act 1988
−− Child Support (Assessment) Act 1989, and
−− Bankruptcy Act 1966.
Portfolio Budget Statements outcome and program
The Family Court of Australia and the Federal Circuit Court of Australia FMA Act agencies were
merged into a single FMA Act agency from 1 July 2013, known as the Family Court and
Federal Circuit Court. On 1 July 2014 FMA Act agencies became non-corporate Commonwealth
entities under the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability Act 2013.
The outcome and program framework of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court sets out the
agency’s commitments to the Government. Each year, details of the framework are outlined in the
Portfolio Budget Statements, along with relevant performance information. Government outcomes
are the intended results, impacts or consequences of actions by the Government on the Australian
community. Agencies deliver programs that are government actions taken to deliver the stated
outcomes. Agencies are required to identify the programs that contribute to government outcomes
over the Budget and forward years.
Outcome
The outcome of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court is described below:
Provide access to justice for litigants in family and federal law matters within the jurisdiction of
the courts through the provision of judicial and support services.
ANNUAL REPORT 2014–2015 11
2
Jurisdiction
2
Program
The Family Court and Federal Circuit Court has a single program under which all services are provided:
Family Court and Federal Circuit Court
The program objectives for the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court are managed via three
separate components:
1. Family Court of Australia
−− The objective of the Family Court of Australia is to support Australian families involved in
complex family disputes by deciding matters according to the law, promptly, courteously and
effectively. This involves:
–– providing decisions in complex family disputes for separating Australian couples and
families through the determination of matters, and
–– providing national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.
2. Federal Circuit Court of Australia
−− The objective of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia is to provide a simple and accessible
alternative to litigation in the Family Court and Federal Court.
−− Where practical, parties are encouraged to resolve their disputes through dispute resolution
and negotiation methods.
3. Family Court and Federal Circuit Court administration
−− The objective of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court administration is to assist the
courts to achieve their stated purpose by:
–– maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make determinations
–– providing effective and efficient registry services
–– effectively and efficiently managing resources, and
–– providing effective information and communication technologies.
Deliverables and key performance indicators
The deliverables and key performance indicators associated with each component encompass
core service standards for judicial services and client services (that is, the family law registries,
where people attend in person, and the National Enquiry Centre, the first point of contact for
telephone and email enquiries).
Although a single entity for the purposes of the Public Governance, Performance and Accountability
Act 2013, the Family Court of Australia remains a separate Chapter III Court under the Australian
Constitution and the deliverables and Key Performance Indicators applicable to the Court,
as identified in the 2014–15 Portfolio Budget Statements are shown on the next page.
Judicial services deliverables
Goal (total number for 2014–15)
Final order finalisations
2822
Interim order finalisations
3367
Consent order finalisations
13,200
Other finalisations
Registries and NEC deliverables
375
Goal (total number for 2014–15)
Telephone enquiries served
270,800
Counter enquiries served
150,000
Email enquiries responded to
50,000
Key performance indicators
Judicial services deliverables
Clearance rate (final orders)
Target
100 per cent
Cases pending conclusion that are less than 12 months old
75 per cent
Reserved judgments are waiting less than three months after
the conclusion of the trial
75 per cent
Number of complaints as a percentage of applications received
1 per cent
Registries and NEC KPIs
Goal (total number for year)
National Enquiry Centre telephone enquiries answered within
90 seconds
80 per cent
Counter enquiries served within 20 minutes
75 per cent
Email enquiries responded to within two working days
80 per cent
Applications lodged processed within two working days
75 per cent
2
Judicial services KPIs
2
Strategic initiatives in the Portfolio Budget Statements
International Framework for Court Excellence
In 2013, the Chief Justice committed the Family Court of Australia to holistically implementing the
International Framework of Court Excellence (the framework).1 Early in 2013, the Chief Justice
formed a Court Excellence Committee, chaired by Justice Murphy, and comprising Justices Finn,
Cronin, Austin and Loughnan with support from Regional Registry Manager, Jane Reynolds.
Having completed a comprehensive internal survey of all judges and staff in 2013 to obtain a robust
‘self-assessment’ of the Court’s functioning against the principles promoted in this framework in the
first year, the Court has spent this financial year implementing the central recommendations arising
from that assessment in order to improve the Court’s performance. The main achievements are
reported below.
The Appeal Division
The Appeal Division is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Family Court and is considered the ‘flagship’
of the Court’s work. To ensure the Appeal Division is properly supported, it has been recommended
that judicial commissions be made to this Division to reflect the legislative provisions of the Act.
Pending appointments being made by the Executive to the Appeal Division, the Family Court has
ensured that the Full Courts are scheduled in a timely way and deliver timely decisions by assigning
first instance judges to the Appeal Division. Further, additional registrar and coordination resources
have been assigned to support the judicial work of the Full Courts and reporting by the Appeal Division.
Governance and communication
On the recommendations of the Court Excellence Committee, the Chief Justice reformed the
governance model of the Court by establishing a new Court Policy Committee to oversee five
new standing committees (see page 109 for more information on the new committee governance
structure). This arrangement has successfully delivered improved decision making,
judicial participation in the business of the Court, and enhanced approaches to implementation
of decisions.
The Chief Justice noted that internal communication could be improved and has implemented a
quarterly report to the judges which sets out the critical developments of the quarter. Her Honour
also provides periodic and timely updates to judges on the business of the Court Policy
Committee, and any other significant deliberations outside of her Honour’s quarterly report.
Strategic Plan
The Court has set in process the development of a strategic plan on critical matters such as its
jurisdiction vis-a-vis the Federal Circuit Court. Noting that jurisdiction for first instance matters is
almost completely concurrent with the Federal Circuit Court’s family law jurisdiction, the strategic
plan is designed to set out a preferred approach for the transfer of matters to the Family Court of
Australia, noting the judicial resources of the Court and its priority to the Appeal Division.
1 www.courtexcellence.com
A critical area of the framework is taking account of court user’s views of their experience of
registry services. In 2014, the courts undertook a second comprehensive court user satisfaction
survey. This survey entailed face-to-face and online surveys of litigants, lawyers and others who
attend the courts.
Over 75 per cent of those surveyed reported overall satisfaction with their experience at the registries.
Users reported that they found staff professional and respectful, the processes of the courts fair and
that the judges listened to their cases.
Areas for improvement included that more courts should start on time and litigants reported that
they would like better information about what to expect when they attend court.
The results of the 2014 survey were, in many respects, similar to those reported in 2011.
Significantly, the survey included detailed questions for litigants not represented by a lawyer.
While those court users reported greater difficulty with some of the processes and procedures
than those who are represented, their satisfaction with staff and with the courts overall, was not
markedly different to those who are represented.
Staff had their say
The staff of the Court participated fully in the court excellence assessment process. The most
central finding was that staff generally enjoy their work and rate the work of the Court highly.
The area for improvement identified in the staff surveys was a call for improved internal
communication, or more precisely, better consultation and engagement about critical matters.
The Executive Director, Client Services, with the registry managers, has worked on this feedback
by convening more regular two-way discussions with staff. One of the outputs of those processes
is the Registry Services Delivery Strategy 2014–19 which sets out a vision for services to the public
and to judges and is reflective of court excellence. See page 33 for more information on this strategy.
Access and inclusion framework for registry services
The Court will continue to develop and implement plans under its access and inclusion framework.
The framework aims to ensure all clients, particularly vulnerable and disadvantaged clients,
receive the assistance they need to access the Court.
The framework acknowledges that justice begins well before a litigant has their first court event,
and that a client’s capacity to participate in court processes is significantly influenced by the quality
of information and the level of administrative support they receive.
Linking to the International Framework for Court Excellence, the framework also takes a broader
view across the shared infrastructure needed to support the delivery of accessible services
(e.g. information technology, training and performance development) as well as identifying the
links, approaches, synergies and principles that affect justice as a whole.
2
Court user satisfaction
2
The current plans under the framework are:
−− Multicultural Plan
−− Family Violence Plan
−− Indigenous Action Plan
−− Disability Action Plan (under development), and
−− Mental Health Support Plan (to be developed).
The Court recognises that people do not neatly fit into a single target client group, hence the
Court has tried to adopt a flexible model of service delivery that allows staff to tailor services
to the individual’s need.
Multicultural Plan 2013–15
The Multicultural Plan was developed in response to a Commonwealth Government requirement.
As part of its development, the Court engaged Maria Dimopoulos of Myriad Consulting to undertake a
comprehensive review of multicultural access and equity at the Court. The review’s findings and
recommendations have informed the projects currently being implemented under the plan.
The following provides highlights of the completed, ongoing and new work undertaken to improve
access and equity for the Court’s culturally and linguistically diverse clients. These have occurred
in addition to work undertaken to improve services at a local registry level.
New projects
Let’s Talk: Cultural Competence e-learning
The Let’s Talk cultural competence e-learning
package provides staff with the knowledge, skills
and awareness needed to work competently with
culturally diverse clients across a range of service
scenarios. Using a specifically built website,
the package uses adult learning principles to deliver
over two hours of training that combines text with
videos, podcasts, TED talks, interactive scenarios,
quizzes, reflection exercises and links. With the
package now complete, staff will commence the
online training in August 2015.
The new Let’s Talk cultural competence
e-learning package
Through the use of hover text, family law terminology used on the Application for Divorce form on
the Commonwealth Courts Portal is now accompanied by plain English definitions. Litigants are
able to hover their mouse over a particular word to view a plain English explanation of its meaning.
This project specifically targets litigants experiencing language barriers and unrepresented litigants.
The court forms available on the Portal also provide links to the LawTermFinder, a website which
allows clients to search for plain English definitions for 400 commonly used family law terms and
view translations, for these terms, into Arabic, Vietnamese, Spanish, Simplified and Traditional
Chinese. LawTermFinder is a joint project between the Attorney-General’s Department and
Macquarie University.
Website rebuild – culturally and linguistically diverse client pages
The Court’s new website (launched in May 2015)
incorporates information and resources for
culturally and linguistically diverse (CaLD)
clients that will help them navigate the family law
system and get the support they need. A landing
page has been specifically designed for CaLD
clients to provide a single and easy gateway to
tailored information, forms, resources and links
to relevant external support.
The culturally and linguistically diverse client
landing page on the Family Court website
National Enquiry Centre (NEC) post-inquiry email
The post-telephone inquiry email, sent by the NEC to clients, now includes updated and
improved links to support clients who require interpreters, those who need mental health
support, Indigenous families, people experiencing family violence and individuals who need
language assistance.
Forced marriage
Staff across the country participated in a workshop held by the Attorney-General’s Department
to raise awareness of forced marriage and trafficking issues for frontline officers who are likely
to come into contact with people in, or at risk of, a forced marriage. The workshop included
best-practice information on how to respond effectively to suspected cases of forced marriage,
including information on the forced marriage legislative framework, key indicators and referral
pathways. Staff have been made aware of the fact sheets and resources that were supplied at
the workshops and copies are available for staff to access.
2
Commonwealth Courts Portalplain language hover text
2
Ongoing work
There are a wide range of standard practices and policies that are specifically aimed to support
CaLD clients and are continually reassessed and updated:
−− staff are skilled to organise and provide access to interpreter services
−− the Court’s community language allowance encourages staff with language skills to develop
and use their language skills with clients
−− all webpages and emails sent to clients provide a link to the LawTermFinder
(lawtermfinder.mq.edu.au) as a source of plain English and translated definitions
of family law terms
−− through collaboration with the Department of Human Services (DHS), the judiciary and staff
have access to DHS’s online guide to ethnic naming practices which covers the naming
conventions of 66 languages, including some from newly emerging Australian communities
−− registry staff refer CaLD clients, where appropriate, to community support services, and
−− the Court participates in a range of Harmony Day activities including recognising outstanding
contributions through Harmony Day Awards.
The NEC
To support CaLD clients, the NEC takes calls in other languages through the Telephone Interpreter
Service. Further, they provide procedural information and legal referrals on a range of topics
often relevant to CaLD clients such as getting documents translated, getting a divorce if you were
married overseas, and information about using interpreters for court events. The NEC has ongoing
involvement with the Forced Marriage Network through workshops and meetings. They also
maintain a close working relationship with the Family Relationship Advice Line who are able to
link CaLD clients, and others with specific support needs, to community and Government services.
Family Violence Plan 2014–16
Family violence remains widespread in Australia affecting adults
and children who experience and or live in fear of it. It directly
affects the physical and emotional wellbeing of families.
The Court’s family violence plan was developed in recognition of
the importance of having a plan which sets out specific actions
to support those experiencing, or at risk of, family violence.
The Family Violence Plan 2014–16
Family Violence Screening Tool
During 2014, Child Dispute Services worked with the American authors of the Mediator’s Assessment
of Safety Issues and Concerns (MASIC) tool to develop a Family Court specific family violence
screening tool. Since April 2015, this tool has been piloted at the Melbourne and Brisbane
registries, using a method in which parents complete and submit responses prior to their interview.
Family consultants can then use an individual’s responses to better target their examination of
family violence risks during clinical interview.
Despite trialling alternate methods for family violence screening – which may or may not be adopted
nationally – there are comprehensive professional directions for family consultants regarding the
assessment of violence risks. These outline a clear, stepwise, and prescriptive process that clinical
staff must undertake when addressing family violence during assessments.
Safety at court
In Brisbane, staff worked with security personnel to ensure that clients who fear for their safety
are able to access Child Dispute Services in a safe and secure manner. This removed previously
existing ambiguity about how clients presented to security staff and steps to be taken.
Ongoing professional development and training
Family consultants
All family consultants joining the Court participate in a mandatory formal clinical induction process
which includes two x 30 minute lectures on family violence within their first six months in the role
and a requirement to read a summary of six academic papers relating to family violence.
Following the substantial legislative amendments in the area of family violence to the Family Law
Act in 2012, family consultants completed a full day of training to ensure that they were apprised
of the legislative changes, and afforded an opportunity to reflect on the manner in which their
clinical practice needed to adapt in line with these amendments.
Ongoing professional development in family violence in 2014–15 was delivered as a series of
three Family Violence Clinical Training Modules to all clinical staff and a monthly seminar series.
The modules focused on the types of personal and professional biases that can impact on clinical
practices, with a particular emphasis on balanced, robust and thorough examination/ reporting
of family violence in written documents. The monthly seminar series involves an external expert
presenting to staff on a topic relevant to their work. In relation to family violence, clinical staff
were provided with regular updates on the empirical trends and practice methods relating to
the assessment and treatment of family violence with topics including Men’s Behaviour Change
Programs – Do They Work and Should We Refer? (Professor Thea Brown); Forensic Examination
of Violence in a Family Law Context (Dr Chris Lennings); and Post-Separation Arrangements in
High Conflict Families (Professor Matthew Sanders).
With different registries seeing different presenting issues in litigants, registries are able to initiate
additional and tailored professional development activities. For example, in Brisbane,
Professor Cathy Humphries presented family violence, separated parents and fathering empirical
insights and intervention challenges to local family consultants.
2
New projects
2
Resources – family consultants
A range of resources are maintained, updated and made available to family consultants to ensure
they access the most up-to-date information and publications relating to family violence (and other
topics). Resources include an extensive collection of chapters and academic papers organised
by topic along with Connections, a software package which hosts video records of seminars and
conferences, as well as slides and academic papers, and includes a recently introduced series of
four x 70 minute videos of a conference delivered by international expert, Dr Phillip Stahl, the first
of which focussed on family violence.
Referrals to community and support organisations
All registries and the NEC provide contact details to litigants for community organisations including
organisations that provide support to those experiencing, or at risk of, family violence.
Some registries have arrangements to provide onsite support. For example, through Domestic
Violence NSW, the Women’s Family Law Support Service is located onsite in the Sydney registry,
and where appropriate, registry services staff advise clients of the service. In Adelaide, the SA
Women’s Information Service Court Support Program Volunteers assist women experiencing
family violence at the Family Court.
Other activities
The physical layout, court listing practices and the use of safety plans are all designed to protect
those who fear for their safety. When litigants have fears about attending a court appointment
at the same time, or in the same room, as a former partner, safe rooms are available in many
registries and provision can sometimes be made for separate entry and exit points for the client.
Alternatively litigants may be able to attend by phone or by video. Court staff are skilled in
developing safety plans and putting measures in place to assure a litigant’s safety.
Registry staff in Adelaide revisited training in relation to the FCC Notice of Risk to ensure they were
clear of the procedures to be undertaken when litigants requests forms and/or seek procedural
information about applications where there are allegations of family violence, risk of family violence,
child abuse and/or risk of child abuse.
In response to a change in the organisations contracted to provide security services to the courts,
registries have provided Safety at Court training for the incoming security guards.
For more information see the Family Violence Committee report on page 116.
The Family Court has a long history of promoting and improving access to justice for Indigenous
families dating back to 1993. In 2004 it developed the Family Court Aboriginal and Torres Strait
Islander Plan and an Indigenous Plan for 2010 to 2013. In 2013 the Chief Justice set up the
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Outreach Committee to ensure that the Court’s administration
and judiciary work hand in hand to enable and facilitate participation of Indigenous Australians in
court processes.
The Court has consulted widely with Indigenous people and through its Indigenous Action Plan
2014–16, has identified and sought to make its services more responsive to the needs of
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children and families. Some of the measures adopted by the
Family Court include cross-cultural education for judicial officers, registrars and family consultants
within the Court; the creation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander positions; the provision of
appropriate information and referrals, and the continued development of relationships with key
organisations and elders in the community.
Two full day training sessions on Indigenous Cultural Competence were held in Sydney and
Townsville attended by regional coordinators, senior family consultants and family consultants
from all registries. The sessions were led by Stephen Ralph, a Forensic Psychologist with
extensive experience working in the field of family law and child protection who is a Koori and a
descendent of the Gumbaynggirr people of the mid-north coast of NSW. Aboriginal people from
local communities attended the training. The Indigenous Cultural Competence training gave
family consultants skills in the particular clinical assessment needs of the Aboriginal community,
a better understanding legislative requirements and the opportunity to build relationships with
Aboriginal community members. At the conclusion of the training, professional directions were
reviewed and were found to be consistent with good practices.
Reconciliation week activities were held in some registries with attendance by local elders and
Aboriginal legal practitioners.
Indigenous courtroom at the Adelaide registry
2
Indigenous Action Plan 2014–16
2
Disability
The Court is currently working with disability experts to develop a Disability Action Plan for 2015–17.
The Family Court will continue to strive to be a court where clients with disability receive the services
and support needed to receive a fair hearing and obtain an appropriate outcome. The Court also
aims to encourage, enable and empower our employees with disability, and those with a carer role,
to achieve their full potential.
New projects
The Court’s new website incorporates information and resources for people with a disability and
their carers that will help them navigate the family law system and get the support they need.
A ‘landing page’ has been specifically designed to provide a single and easy gateway to tailored
information, forms, resources and links to relevant external support.
Ongoing work
There are a wide range of standard practices and policies that are specifically aimed to support
people with a disability. Hearing loops are provided in court proceedings for hearing impaired
litigants, and staff facilitate the presence of hearing dogs/ seeing eye dogs/ support animals in
courtrooms. The Court supports Hearing Awareness Week each year.
Mental health
Through the development of a Mental Health Action
Plan, the Court hopes to build on extensive work
done previously on setting up processes, referrals,
responses and support needed to assist those who
are mentally unwell or distressed.
The Court recognises that separation and divorce
is stressful and that it has an obligation, through its
practices, to support people wherever possible.
The mental health client landing page on the
Family Court website
−− referral to community organisations that are able to provide counselling and mental health
support during separation and divorce
−− protocols to get the right immediate assistance in situations where someone is threatening
to harm themselves or others either in person or over the telephone
−− providing resources to clients about handling stress, and
−− the recent launch of a single landing page on the Court’s new website for those with mental
health and/or emotional support needs which links to a range of resources and support.
Enhancing service to court users through information technology
The courts are continuously seeking to enhance access to justice and to provide meaningful
information necessary to advance litigation via their information technology systems. The courts’
IT strategies include being attentive to the needs of those who live in regional Australia, those who have
limited means, those who do not have legal representation, and those who may be disadvantaged
as a result of violence or language or some other barrier to justice.
Strategic initiatives to advance this effort include:
Ongoing improvement to the Commonwealth Courts Portal
The Commonwealth Courts Portal (www.comcourts.gov.au), launched in July 2007, is a continuing
initiative of the Family Court, the Federal Court and the Federal Circuit Court. The Portal provides
free web-based access to information about cases that are before these courts.
After registering, lawyers and parties can keep track of their cases, identify documents that have
been filed and view outcomes, orders made and future court dates. Users log on using a single
user ID and access multiple jurisdictions from a single central web-based system.
A popular function of the Portal is the ability for users to elect to be notified of any recent activity
on their files. In 2014–15 more than 250,000 such notifications were sent.
2
In previous training, staff were given skills in mental health first aid, on how to give appropriate
initial help and support to someone experiencing a mental health issue. Further, the Court has
in place a range of standard practices and policies that support people with mental health issues
or who are experiencing emotional distress. Current practices include:
2
The eFiling functions continue to be expanded and a number of enhancements were made to
the Portal, including:
−− application for Consent Orders can now be eFiled
−− a number of supplementary documents can now be eFiled
−− mandatory Notice of Risk has been added to Initiating Application and Initiating Application
Response eForms to assist in identifying cases with a risk of family violence, and
−− a new function to allow members of the public to request a copy of their divorce certificate for
divorces granted before implementation of the Commonwealth Courts Portal (certificates can
be downloaded directly from the Portal for more recent divorces).
Work has also continued to ensure that the Commonwealth Courts Portal complies with version
2.0 Level ‘AA’ of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines. In addition, a complete end-to-end
usability review of the Portal was undertaken with a user experience expert advising on improved
screen designs. Development of these screens is expected to commence in 2015–16.
The following statistics highlight the significant growth in the number of Portal users as at 30 June 2015:
−− 5943 firms now registered (up from 4900 at 30 June 2014)
−− lawyer registrations have increased to 12,007 (up from 10,000 at 30 June 2014)
−− total registered users now at 196,865 (up from 153,092 at 30 June 2014).
Table 2.1 Registered users of the Commonwealth Courts Portal, 2011–12 to 2014–15
30 June 2012
30 June 2013
30 June 2014
30 June 2015
Number of law
firms registered
3280
4134
4965
5943
Number of lawyers
registered
6746
8370
9921
12,007
78,586
109,738
143,171
184,858
85,332
118,108
153,092
196,865
Other users
Total registered users
2011–12
2012–13
2013–14
2014–15
4912
7121
8927
10,797
Albury
501
802
1114
1695
Alice Springs
109
136
70
84
27,379
35,666
41,609
48,362
Cairns
1076
1350
1918
2619
Canberra
2004
2914
3420
4160
863
1000
1452
1757
5331
7594
9251
10,339
Darwin
359
519
822
1071
Dubbo
363
660
874
1257
Hobart
562
700
1001
1255
Launceston
734
876
902
976
1109
1672
2274
2658
Melbourne
19,329
31,650
37,747
45,774
Newcastle
4724
6700
8734
11,469
Parramatta
7736
11,101
13,441
17,729
746
1311
1664
1909
10,466
15,372
18,998
23,925
Townsville
2115
2787
2904
3758
Wollongong
1444
2352
3341
4004
91,862
132,283
160,463
195,598
Adelaide
Brisbane
Coffs Harbour
Dandenong
Lismore
Rockhampton
Sydney
Total
In Western Australia there were 7460 documents eFiled during 2014–15.
2
Table 2.2 Documents eFiled in the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court, 2011–12 to
2014–15
2
Major Casetrack enhancement
Casetrack is the courts’ case management system introduced in 2002. A major enhancement
is currently underway to improve its useability. The changes will introduce new and updated
functionality, including a modern browser-based technology that provides a simplified approach
to managing the work done in chambers and in other areas of the courts’ operations. The first
new module was implemented in March 2014 and was specifically designed to simplify the
way chambers manage their dockets. Development of additional functionality continued during
2014–15.
Over recent years, and in response to the emerging challenging financial position, the courts
have separately, and as a combined entity, undertaken significant initiatives to reduce costs
and generate efficiencies; however there are still significant financial pressures upon the
Family Court and Federal Circuit Court.
Following consideration of various reviews into the courts’ structural funding issues, the Government
announced in its 2015–16 Budget that the following initiatives would be undertaken to assist the
courts in funding their operations into the future:
−− the courts’ fees would be raised to generate additional funding, part of which would be
retained by the courts to assist in meeting future funding requirements
−− the efficiency dividend arrangements applied by Government to agency funding would be
adjusted to recognise that judicial salaries were not a controllable cost of the courts
−− losses for 2015–16, 2016–17 and 2017–18 were approved, and
−− the courts’ shared corporate service arrangements would be consolidated,
effective 1 July 2016, into the Federal Court of Australia.
The above initiatives are expected to allow the courts to operate at their current activity levels and
staffing in 2015–16. The resourcing plans for the consolidated shared service arrangements from
2016–17 will be finalised as part of the corporate consolidation process with the Federal Court
of Australia.
Outlook for 2015–16
In 2015–16, the following may have an impact on the Court and its delivery of services:
−− the implementation of the Government’s 2015–16 Budget decision to streamline the courts
corporate shared services arrangements by consolidating these functions into the Federal Court
of Australia from 1 July 2016. A significant amount of work and resources will be required
in 2015–16 to prepare for this consolidation of services to ensure an efficient and effective
transition is achieved
−− any Government decisions during the year that relate to the Australian Public Service
employment arrangements
−− Government or other initiatives relating to dealing with family violence, and
−− ongoing work concerning the adoption of the International Framework for Court Excellence.
2
Budgetary pressures
2
Court service locations
Table 2.3 Family Court of Australia service locations
Australian Capital Territory
Canberra (J, R, FC, CS)
New South Wales
Albury R&R (CS, RC), Armidale (RC, FamC),
Coffs Harbour (JC, RC), Dubbo R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC),
Lismore R&R (CS, JC, RC, FC), Newcastle (J, R, FC, CS),
Parramatta (J, R, FC, CS), Port Macquarie (FamC),
Sydney (J, R, FC, CS), Tamworth (RC, FamC),
Wollongong R&R (R, CS, FC)
Northern Territory
Alice Springs R&R (JC, FamC), Darwin (CS, JC, RC, FC)
Queensland
Brisbane (J, R, FC, CS),
Cairns R&R (R, FC, CS, JC), Mackay (JC, RC, FamC),
Rockhampton R&R (CS, JC, RC, FamC),
Townsville (J, R, FC, CS)
South Australia
Adelaide (J, R, FC, CS)
Tasmania
Devonport R&R (RC), Hobart (J, R, FC, CS),
Launceston R&R (CS, FC, JC, RC)
Victoria
Ballarat (RC), Bendigo (RC), Dandenong (R, FC, CS),
Geelong (RC), Melbourne (J, R, FC, CS), Mildura (RC),
Morwell (RC), Shepparton (RC), Warrnambool (RC)
Legend
J – Judge
R – Registrar
FC – Family Consultant
CS – Client Services
JC – Judicial Circuit
RC – Registrar Circuit
FamC – Family Consultant Circuit
R&R – Rural and Regional Registry
Registry or rural and regional registry
Circuit location
2
DARWIN
BRISBANE
ADELAIDE
SYDNEY
CANBERRA
MELBOURNE
HOBART
2
Court initiatives
Live Chat
Live Chat was launched on the courts’ websites in April 2014.
Live Chat is a cost effective and easily manageable channel of communication. Staff can multi-task
and manage up to four conversations at once and it also provides a convenient way for clients to
access the courts and engage with client service officers.
Since its launch, the courts have received 46,459 live chats.
Key statistics
−− 187 live chats per day.
−− 27 per cent of questions are about Portal support
−− 73 per cent are general questions, and
−− the most popular questions are about applying for a divorce and parenting applications.
Live Chat is available during business hours and can be accessed from the homepages of:
www.familycourt.gov.au, www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au and www.comcourts.gov.au
Twitter
The Family Court of Australia’s Twitter account has been operating since October 2012. Twitter provides
followers with timely, relevant and easy to access information about the Family Court of Australia and
family law issues.
Followers are predominately made up of legal professionals, law students, journalists and members
of the general public.
−− attracted 976 new followers, bringing the total number of followers to 1974
−− tweeted 324 times– an average of over six tweets per week
−− was re-tweeted 635 times, and
−− had a potential reach of 1,393,251.
Follow the Court on Twitter https://twitter.com/FamilyCourtAU
YouTube
The Court’s YouTube channel provides information to clients in a different way to the usual form or
fact sheet. Videos currently available include:
−− How to apply for a divorce: serving divorce papers
−− File your application online with the Commonwealth Courts Portal
−− Islamic family law in Australia book launch
−− Chief Justice Diana Bryant AO – family violence interview
−− Australian leadership award – improving women’s access to justice in family law in the Pacific
−− Mediation – what to expect, and
−− Court Tour.
Visit the Family Court’s YouTube channel at https://www.youtube.com/user/familycourtAU
Online proof of divorce
An online proof of divorce request process was introduced to streamline the process for people
wanting to obtain a copy of their divorce order from the courts. The process involves a person
completing an online interactive form and submitting payment online by credit card. The Court
then provides an original copy of the divorce.
The new process has been very successful and to date 2454 requests have been made since
the online interactive from was introduced on 28 March 2015.
The new process has also streamlined the process for the courts in reducing the amount of back
office paperwork and time to process the requests.
2
During 2014–15 the Court:
2
Registry waiting times
Data from the courts’ client queue management system concerning client service waiting times and
the number of clients waiting for service at registry counters is transferred to the courts’ websites.
This provides lawyers and litigants with a view of wait times in the registry in real time. It informs
lawyers and litigants about the best time to visit registries, when demand is lower and they are
likely to spend less time waiting. It also assists registry staff in providing a better client service.
This is a small, low cost initiative aimed at improving customer service, providing better visibility
for litigants and lawyers regarding wait times, and using our existing resources efficiently and
effectively by spreading demand across business hours.
Counter waiting times are available for the Adelaide, Brisbane, Dandenong, Melbourne, Parramatta and
Sydney registries.
Intranet upgrade
Significant progress on the intranet upgrade has been made, however due to limited resources
and realignment of priorities, the intranet upgrade project has been delayed and the new intranet
is yet to be launched. The intranet will, however, benefit from a number of lessons learned from
the website redevelopment.
There was a change of scope for the intranet search requirement to include enterprise search
which has now been implemented and provides the intranet with enhanced search capabilities
across multiple platforms.
Work still to be done includes:
−− completion of content migration – to date over 5000 content items have been migrated
−− undertake quality assurance of content, and
−− resolve a small number of outstanding technical issues.
It is expected that the intranet launch will take place in 2015–16.
Registry Services Return
In 2015 a new reporting framework called the Registry Service Quarterly Return (RSR) was developed.
The RSR is designed to demonstrate that the operations in support of both courts in each registry are
being managed appropriately and effectively.
The RSR ensures a consistent focus with the Registry Services Strategy; demonstrates a systematic
approach to monitoring and managing registry services; monitors areas of important compliance
formally and regularly; identifies and mitigates areas of challenge and share success; and identifies
issues of national impact so that a holistic strategic response can be developed and implemented.
−− electronic filing
−− subpoena management
−− identification of inefficient registry practices
−− circuit management issues, and
−− new initiatives commenced within the registries.
The consolidated RSR provides a great deal of value to the courts as it:
−− provides visibility and sharing of challenges and successes across registries on a quarterly
basis, and assists in building a cohesive registry services management team
−− places greater importance on key management reports to improve understanding of the
dynamics and operations of the registry they lead
−− helps registry managers refocus regularly on agreed priorities, both tactical and strategic
−− demonstrates to stakeholders, in a structured way, how registry services are managed
recognising the budget and resources provided, and
−− further supports key objectives of the Court’s Excellence Framework.
Registry Services Delivery Strategy 2014–19
Registry managers met in May 2014 to develop a service delivery strategy for 2014–19.
The strategy, which is reviewed annually, focuses on the courts’ priorities over a five year period.
Key initiatives in the strategy include:
−− provide services that can be easily used via a range of pathways (live chat, portal, website,
phone and counter) with 24/7 access via the portal and website
−− adapt our services to the needs of court users, and empower them to prepare and manage
their cases
−− provide timely and high level support to the judiciary of both courts
−− ensure that our staff are adding value by being knowledgeable, well trained and courteous
−− provide user-friendly forms, simplified processes and accurate, up-to-date information
−− provide technologically innovative solutions such as the electronic court file
−− maintain up-to-date user-friendly websites that effectively meet the needs of litigants,
lawyers and the public
−− develop a range of innovative online services such as lodgment of consent orders and divorce
applications and enable payments
−− make available a range of services provided by staff with the training and experience to show
empathy for clients in a challenging period of their lives, and
−− provide face-to-face assistance to litigants who have special needs and/or require greater levels
of support.
2
The RSR also provides for reporting on broader issues, including:
2
Projects that will be gradually introduced over the next few years include:
−− an electronic court file that integrates the needs of the judiciary, increases accessibility for
litigants and lawyers and minimises administrative overheads
−− a ‘virtual registry’ that enables lawyers to leverage their own systems to access all the court-related
information they need, as well as enabling them to initiate applications, make payments and
complete all of their transactions with the courts online
−− specialised counter and telephone services for litigants who are unable to find the information
they need, or complete the relevant transactions online, and
−− training to ensure our staff are able to help litigants, lawyers and the judiciary derive maximum
benefit from the gradual introduction of new technologies.
Projects that will be further explored over the next few years include:
−− a smart phone/tablet application designed to facilitate access to specific services such as
fee payments and event reminders
−− utilisation of social networking tools to provide users with current information about registry services
−− partnerships with State and Commonwealth agencies designed to enhance and streamline
the provision of services in rural and regional Australia, and
−− a move to a model of registry service where the legal profession interacts with the courts by
electronic means.
At the first annual review, the Executive Director Client Services advised that the strategy remained
current and that many of the identified projects were well advanced, including the cashless
registry, eDivorce, eConsent and the registry services Wiki.
Client Service Senior Manager’s Group
The Client Service Senior Managers’ Group (CSSMG) comprises registry managers and registry and
judicial service managers from the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court. The group aims to be
innovative in the development of new ideas and seeks to identify and implement ways to continually
improve service delivery across the courts by streamlining procedures, ensuring consistency in work
practice, providing better information and enhancing client contact with the courts.
During the reporting period, the group met on four occasions by video-link as well as communicating
via the courts’ Connections technology through a ‘CSSMG community’. Through this community
members can discuss issues, provide reports, post blogs and upload files for discussion within
the group.
−− developing a strategy to move to a cashless registry environment by 1 July 2015
−− ongoing exploration of eFiling procedures to ensure that the most efficient use of the
technology is being implemented in response to the growth in eFiling
−− enhancing the staff Peer Support Program, which provides practical and emotional support
for court staff when there are distressing events at work
−− assisting with the implementation of the new Notice of Risk form in the Federal Circuit Court –
a mandatory form for any person who files an application or response seeking parenting orders
in the Federal Circuit Court on or after 12 January 2015, and
−− assisting with debt collection strategies for unpaid fees.
There are other initiatives that are still under development, which will be implemented in the next
financial year.
Child Dispute Services fact sheets
CHILD DISPUTE SERVICES
chilD Dispute seRvices
FACT SHEET
Seeing a family consultant in the Family Court –
Frequently asked questions
I have been ordered to attend an appointment
with a family consultant.
Who are family consultants?
Family consultants are qualified social workers or
psychologists, with skill and experience in working
with children and families. They are appointed by
the Court to help parents and judges achieve the
best outcomes for children. Family consultants are
recognised as court experts in children’s matters.
Where do family consultants fit into the court
process?
Family consultants are advisors to the Court. They are
only involved with disputes about children. They are
not involved in disputes about property or finances.
In the Family Court, your case may be heard first
by a registrar, who will make orders about how
the case proceeds. The registrar may order that the
family takes part in the Child Responsive Program.
This program is aimed at helping the judge and the
parents understand what the children need. There
are a series of steps in the Child Responsive Program,
which include individual interviews with the parents/
carers (known as an Intake and Assessment Meeting)
and usually interviews with the child/ren (known as a
Child and Family Meeting).
For more information, see the fact sheet Child
Responsive Program.
After these interviews, the family consultant will write
a Children and Parents Issues Assessment and may
attend court on the first day of the trial. The trial
happens in stages. On the first day of the trial, after the
judge has heard initial information from the parents/
carers and the family consultant, the judge may ask the
family consultant to interview the parties and children
again and make a full, detailed assessment of what is
happening in the family and what the child/ren need,
and make recommendations about what is best for
the child/ren. The written report of this assessment is
known as a Family Report. Once the Family Report
has been prepared, the trial will resume. The family
consultant may be a witness at the trial.
For more information, see the fact sheet Family Reports.
family Dispute Resolution (hague Matters)
What is a hague convention case?
How soon after the order is made in court will
I receive notification of my appointment?
The Hague Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction is an international treaty under
which arrangements are made for the return of children who have been wrongfully removed from or retained
outside their country of habitual residence.
Appointments for an Intake and Assessment Meeting
and a Child and Family Meeting are made to fit with
your next court date.
The Convention sets up a central authority in each signature country to deal with applications for the return of
children taken to or from each country. The Australian Government Attorney-General's Department is the central
authority for Australia.
Appointments for a Family Report are made so that
the report is available by the due date given by the
Court. This may be some time after the order is made.
The Court will always try to make sure that you have
as much notice as possible.
How long will the appointment take?
Guiding principles and objectives

For an Intake and Assessment Meeting you should
allow approximately two hours.
The Hague Convention operates on the guiding
principles that:
it applies only to matters where the subject child
is under the age of 16. Proceedings under the
Convention cease on the day a child turns 16,
and
For a Child and Family Meeting you should allow
half a day.

the child’s welfare is best protected by a rapid
response to a parent having removed a child from
their country of habitual residence, and

the child must have habitually resided in a
contracting state directly before rights of custody
or access were breached.

child abduction in general must be prevented.
A judicial officer hearing a Hague matter may indicate
early in the process that dispute resolution may be
of assistance to parties, not just in relation to the
matter of return but in relation to parenting matters
generally. The judicial officer would encourage the
parties to agree on a dispute resolution process. If
the parties agree to participate in a dispute resolution
process, discussion then occurs about the most
suitable service provider. Due to the timeliness of
any Hague intervention, there are occasions where
it is more suitable for a family consultant (who has
undertaken specific training in dispute resolution)
located within Child Dispute Services, to undertake
the work. Other services in the community are well
placed to provide such services but may not be well
placed to provide the service in a timeframe that
aligns with judicial timeframes and expectations.
For a Family Report appointment, the appointment
letter may spell out how long you will need. Otherwise
you should allow a full day, as there may be a series
of appointments throughout the day. The family
consultant may also need to see you more than once.
The Convention aims to:
I am worried about my safety when I’m at court.
What can I do?
If you have any concerns about your safety while
attending court, or any appointment ordered by the
Court, call the National Enquiry Centre on 1300
352 000 before your court appointment or trial.
Options for your safety will be discussed. The Court
takes allegations of violence very seriously and a safety
plan will be put in place where the Court is aware
of concerns. By law, people must inform a court if
there is an existing or pending family violence order
involving themselves or their children.
For more information see the brochure
Do you have fears for your safety when attending court?

secure the prompt return of a child wrongfully
removed to or retained in a country which is
party to the Convention (‘contracting state’) to
the country (‘state’) of habitual residence

ensure that rights of custody and/or access of the
state of origin are respected, with judgement on
the custody to be rendered in that country, on
the assumption that the court in the country of
habitual residence is best able to make decision
for the child, and

ensure the relevant court in the country of
habitual residence is best able to make decisions
for the children.
The Convention operates under the following specific
conditions:
Can I bring a support person to my
appointment?

You can have a support person with you in the
waiting area, but it is up to the family consultant to
decide whether your support person is included in the
interview, and in what way. The family consultant will
discuss this with you.
This fact sheet provides general information only and does not provide legal advice. If you have a legal issue, you should contact a lawyer
before making a decision about what to do or applying to the Court. The Family Court cannot provide legal advice.
FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
fact sheet
If the matter is suitable for referral to Child Dispute
Services, a notation is made in orders that the parties
agree to the process.
it applies only between contracting states, and
so only has force where both countries are
signatories to the Convention
This fact sheet provides general information only and does not provide legal advice. If you have a legal issue, you should contact a lawyer
before making a decision about what to do or applying to the Court. The Family Court cannot provide legal advice.
1
Seeing a family consultant FAQ –
Family Court of Australia
faMily couRt of austRalia
Family Dispute Resolution
(Hague Matters)
Two new fact sheets were added to the Child Dispute Services fact sheet range:
−− Seeing a family consultant FAQ – Family Court of Australia, and
−− Family Dispute Resolution (Hague Matters).
This brings the Child Dispute Services range to eight fact sheets. These can be accessed on
the Family Court website under Publications > By topic.
2
CSSMG was involved in several priority projects during 2014–15 including:
2
How do I?
In conjunction with the launch of the Court’s
new website, a series of new How do I?
pages have been developed. These include:
−− Apply for a divorce
−− Serve a divorce
−− Serve a divorce by hand
−− Serve a divorce by post
−− Apply to the Court for a dispensation of service or
substituted service order when I cannot find the
respondent to serve the application for divorce
−− Apply for consent orders
−− Apply for parenting orders
The How do Is section is designed to help
unrepresented litigants through the common
court processes
−− Apply for property and financial orders
−− Apply to the Court when parenting orders have
been breached or not complied with
−− Serve an initiation application
−− Electronically file an application, and
−− Register for the Commonwealth Courts Portal.
The How do I’s are designed to help unrepresented litigants through the common court processes
by providing a step-by-step guide, related links and frequently asked questions.
These can be accessed through the homepage of the Court’s website at www.familycourt.gov.au
IBM Connections
Connections has continued to provide a forum for planning activities and projects as well as
supporting communication and collaboration across the courts.
Key achievements in 2014–15 include:
−− growth in the number of communities from 143 at 30 June 2014 to 150 at 27 May 2015
−− increased use of wikis in providing a centralised platform to share information. There are
currently 119 wikis totalling 2357 pages. To date they have been utilised as knowledge
bases for professional development, procedures and training materials as well as supporting
day-to-day operations across the courts. Examples include:
–– a client service wiki which has been developed to support the work of the NEC
–– the development of a wiki aimed to support Registry Services staff by providing improved
access to procedures and processes. The wiki will provide a platform for staff to share
knowledge and best practice ideas
−− increased use of Blogs as a communication tool within teams and communities. There are
currently 92 blogs across the courts.
During 2014–15 a number of changes and upgrades were made to the courts’ IT infrastructure to
meet the courts’ needs and improve performance and stability.
Infrastructure improvements in the financial year included:
−− all of the courts’ Blackberry devices were replaced with Apple iPhones
−− new laptops were purchased to replace the courts’ laptop fleet
−− a new Wide Area Network (WAN) was implemented to deliver increased bandwidth to all
court registries
−− migration to a new Internet Gateway was completed
−− modelling showed potential weaknesses in the courts’ database servers, so these were
upgraded to cope with increased load as the courts move towards an Electronic Court File
−− a trial of technology on the Bench commenced, with a view to understanding options for
providing information electronically to judges sitting in court
−− recording functionality was added to the courts’ videoconferencing system to allow recording
of presentations for later viewing, and
−− IT infrastructure was installed in new premises in Sydney and Darwin.
Court tour goes interactive
In December 2014 the Family Court of Australia
and Federal Circuit Court of Australia added a
new video-based court tour to their YouTube
channels. The video has been developed for
unrepresented litigants who have a matter in
front of a judge or registrar.
The court tour covers important areas such as:
−− preparing for court
−− how to speak to court officers and members
of the judiciary
−− what to expect in the courtroom
−− court orders, and
−− feeling safe in court.
The court tour aims to assist unrepresented
litigants who have a matter in front of a judge
or registrar
To view the court tour, go to youtube.com/user/familycourtAU
2
Infrastructure improvements
2
Independent Children’s Lawyers conference
The Children’s Committee of the Family Court of Australia, the Federal Circuit Court of Australia and
the Family Court of Western Australia, in conjunction with National Legal Aid and the Family Law
Section, held the inaugural national conference for Independent Children’s Lawyers in Sydney in
October 2014.
The conference attracted over 140 delegates, with keynote speakers including Justice Colin Forrest
(Family Court), Chief Judge Pascoe (Federal Circuit Court) and Chief Judge Thackray (Family Court
of Western Australia).
Key topics discussed included children’s participation; initiatives to support ICL practices;
keeping children safe; ethical jeopardy and how it works; and honouring the role.
Family law registries cashless from 1 July 2015
Family law registries are going
cashless from 1 July 2015
Payment for filing and
event based fees can still
be made in registries via:
• eftpos
• debit card
• credit card
A proposal to remove cash payments was first presented to
the Chief Executive Officer’s Management Advisory Group in
2005, however was not supported at that time due to other
priorities. The significant technological advances in recent
years, particularly in card payments and e-lodgment, provided
the impetus for the courts’ administration to reconsider the
issue, including considering the removal of cheque payments,
which aligns with the Registry Services Delivery Strategy 2014–19.
Prior to proceeding, approximately 80 per cent of respondents
to a survey question indicated they would be unaffected by
the removal of cash and cheques. Specifically, by increasing
the number of processes that can be completed online,
additional resources can be available for tailored face-to-face
services. Additionally, the courts identified that the removal of
cash and cheque payments from registries offered significant
reductions in direct and indirect costs, and would reduce the risk to staff health and safety
resulting from cash management.
Some court filing fees
can also be paid
online when filing using
the Commonwealth
Courts Portal
www.comcourts.gov.au
www.familycourt.gov.au
www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au
In 2014 an implementation plan for eliminating cash and cheque payments was developed.
After consultation with internal and external stakeholders, a two stage approach was developed.
Stage one involved the removal of cash payments from registries from 1 July 2015. This change
was communicated to the general public and the legal profession through the websites and
signage from March 2015.
Stage two involves consultation with the legal profession about eliminating cheques from early
2016. The administration has made a formal representation to the Family Law Section of the
Law Council and will advance the concept with the legal profession informally at meetings and
other forums during 2015. The administration will also continue to develop online payment
options to assist law firms and clients to transition to a cashless and chequeless environment.
The Family Court website (www.familycourt.gov.au)
and the Federal Circuit Court website
(www.federalcircuitcourt.gov.au) have been upgraded
and rebuilt, with the new websites officially launched
on 29 May 2015.
The Family Law Courts website
(www.familylawcourts.gov.au) was decommissioned
at that time with content moved onto the
Federal Circuit Court website. Links to the Family Law
Courts website have been redirected to either
the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court website.
The upgrade was a significant project which was
in response to changes in requirements and
expectations by the Government, practitioners and
the general public.
2
New websites deliver improved access to court services
The new Family Court website was launched on
29 May 2015
The new design and layout of the websites reflects
best practice for web design and incorporates feedback from a sample of key stakeholders.
The new websites deliver improved access to court services, better structured information, an easy
to follow navigation and a greater focus on e-services. The websites provide specific site areas
for those parts of the community who have special requirements. In addition, they will provide a
translation and read back facility in multiple languages in the coming months.
For more information about the project see page 77 (In focus) or to provide feedback email
[email protected]
Mediation – what to expect
Mediation – what to expect, is the latest video available on the Family Court’s YouTube channel.
The video was produced for the 5th LawAsia, Family Law and Children’s Rights Conference in
Sapporo Japan which was held in June 2014. The video was also used for the Australia–Indonesia
justice partnership, in light of Indonesia’s introduction of mediation to family law disputes.
The video shows a mock mediation between a couple (an Australian father and Japanese mother)
who are trying to come to an agreement about parenting arrangements. In particular, whether their
two children will live with their father in Australia or with their mother in Japan. In light of Japan’s
signing of the Hague Convention at the beginning of 2014, the video is a timely and useful resource
for people who are going into mediation, not knowing what to expect.
Justin Dowd, a long standing member of LawAsia’s Family Law and Children’s Rights Section
and an instrumental part of the video’s production, presented the video at the LawAsia
conference in Sapporo, along with members of the legal profession from Singapore, Japan and
the United Kingdom.
2
Australian Standards of Practice for Family Assessments and Reporting
On 11 February 2015 the Family Court of Australia, Family Court
of Western Australia and Federal Circuit Court of Australia,
launched the Australian Standards of Practice for Family
Assessments and Reporting, a publication developed by the
three courts which aims to establish a nationally consistent
approach when family assessments are undertaken and reports
developed for the courts that deal with family law within Australia.
The publication outlines best practice and identifies a range
of minimum standards that are expected by the courts in the
development of family reports. The quality and consistency in
the information provided to the judicial officer overseeing the
case is critical in determining what is in the best interests of
the child in each case.
This publication will not only assist those who develop the
reports, but will provide transparency and assist lawyers and
those involved in family law, to better understand what family
assessments and reports entail and what can be expected
from the process.
The Australian Standards of
Practice for Family Assessments
and Reporting
Chief Justice Bryant, Chief Judge Pascoe and Chief Judge Thackray have stated that, ‘It is
imperative that judicial officers, and all of those involved in children’s cases, are fully informed
of the issues relevant to those families. This document will assist in ensuring that we have
uniformity and consistency in the quality of information that is prepared for the courts’.
For more information see the Australian Standards of Practice for Family Assessments and
Reporting at www.familycourt.gov.au
Seventh International Courts Administration Conference
In September 2014 the International Association for Court
Administration’s (IACA), Seventh International Conference
took place in Sydney with over 40 countries represented
and more than 250 delegates attending, including staff and
members of the judiciary of both the Family Court of Australia
and Federal Circuit Court of Australia.
This year’s conference was titled International Perspectives on
Justice Administration 10 years on… and provided delegates
with a unique opportunity to meet and collaborate with court
administrators from around the world.
Chief Executive Officer of the Family Court and Federal Circuit
Court and outgoing President of IACA, Richard Foster said
‘The discussions that took place over the three days of the
conference will go a long way to enhancing and improving the
delivery of court services and access to justice around the world’.
IACA
International Association
for Court Administration
INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
FOR COURT ADMINISTRATION
CONFERENCE
SYDNEY, AUSTRALIA
International Perspectives on Justice
Administration 10 years on...
International Framework for Excellence and
measuring performance
An exploration of the roles of judicial officers and
court administrators and how the relationship
between them may be improved and enhanced
Current developments in court technology
International perspectives on best practice in
courtroom design and court security
Professional development and managing change in
the legal environment
Managing succession in courts administration
Access to justice in developing countries
Facilitating access to courts for disadvantaged
groups and children
Alternate Dispute Resolution practices
Courts working with multicultural communities
Courts cooperating with volunteers, non-government
organisations and support services
Communication with Court Stakeholders and
provision of information to Court Clients
www.iaca.ws
24 – 26 September 2014
Over 40 countries were represented
at the International Association
for Court Administration’s seventh
International Conference
IACA’s international conferences are held every two years. The next conference will be held
in the USA.
Mobile application and booths in registries
A free mobile app’ – called iRefer Vic – launched in 2014,
provides users with a searchable directory of programs and
services that are available to families experiencing separation.
The app’, developed by the Victorian Family Law Pathways
Network, provides people with information that will
complement, supplement or pre-empt agreements made
by parties, or orders of the courts. It provides information
and referral pathways to services that avoid conflict in the
courtroom, or continuing conflict at home, with services
grouped into categories such as counselling, family dispute
resolution and mental health services.
iRefer provides a directory of
programs and services for
families experiencing separation
In addition to the iRefer app’, Victorian Family Law Pathways,
with the support of the courts, have established booths,
staffed by law students, in the Melbourne and Dandenong
registries to assist litigants with referral/ contact details to
external legal services.
Community relationships and consultation
Registry managers of the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court assist the Court with community
relationship building. Much of this work is done at the local level. Engagement with local
communities, community-based organisations concerned with family support and the family law
system, community forums, law societies, family law pathway networks, volunteer networks and
other government agencies, including many at the State level, are something that the Court has
been reporting in some detail in recent years in an appendix to the annual report.
The reporting shows that different registries take different approaches, reflecting local needs
and opportunities and capacity for action. Activities are highlighted in Appendix nine.
2
A range of court administrators, international judicial members and academics presented on
topics including succession planning in court administration, access to justice for vulnerable
groups and building and sustaining public confidence through communication strategies and
social media.
2
International cooperation
Indonesia court-to-court cooperation – 10 years on
The Family Court of Australia’s engagement with the Indonesian courts first began in 2004 under
the court-to-court partnership funded by the Australian Government. The Court has collaborated
on a wide scope of activities, involving many judges, court staff and court administrators from both
Indonesia and Australia.
This work has been underpinned by a strong research focus in collaboration with the courts,
Indonesian research institutes and civil society organisations. It identified access to justice barriers
which the courts then sought to resolve using a variety of innovative and effective approaches.
By removing these barriers to justice, the Indonesian courts have witnessed a significant increase
in the ability of women, the poor and people living in remote areas to access the courts for their
family law matters.
In 2013, more than 85 per cent of all civil cases heard in Indonesian courts and more than 70 per cent
of all cases heard in Indonesia related to family law and legal identity matters. Matters included
marriage legalisation cases, divorce cases and birth certificate cases. Therefore the need to legalise
marriage, formalise a divorce, or recognise children from a marriage are critical for Indonesian
citizens regardless of their wealth, level of education or place of residence.
Over the last decade the collaboration between the Family Court of Australia and the Supreme Court
of Indonesia has focussed on three major research undertakings culminating in widely circulated
publications in 2008, 2010 and February 2014.
The research, supported by successive Australian Government law and justice programs,
identified barriers faced by women who are poor in accessing the courts for their marriage legalisation
and divorce cases. This research, and the Supreme Court of Indonesia’s access to justice initiatives
being implemented in the Religious Courts, have been highlighted in a number of international
publications including:
−− the 2011 Progress of the World’s Women report produced by United Nations Women, and
−− the 2012 World Development Report on Gender Equality and Development.
Some key findings from the research include:
−− nine out of every 10 women who were poor were unable to access the Religious Courts due to
cost, distance and lack of understanding of the process. For the large number of Indonesians
living under the poverty line, and for those in rural and remote areas, court fees and transport
costs can often amount to two times their average monthly income
−− nine out of 10 women would be more motivated to obtain a legal divorce if court fees were
waived and if a circuit court were held in a nearby town
−− the majority of couples surveyed did not have a marriage certificate and three quarters of their
children do not have birth certificates.
−− the Indonesian Government estimates suggest that as many as 50 million Indonesians and
60 per cent of all Indonesian children under five do not have birth certificates, and
−− the failure to obtain legal documentation in relation to marriage and divorce is associated with
56 per cent of children from these marriages not obtaining birth certificates.
2
Collaborating on this research was an important step; however the Indonesian courts went much
further in terms of the policies it implemented over subsequent years to attempt to address barriers
faced by women, the poor and people living in remote areas in accessing the Indonesian courts.
Some of these polices include:
−− the publication of online court judgments to improve transparency
−− the introduction of court fee waivers for the poor
−− the introduction of circuit courts so that judges can deliver justice to those marginalised rural
and remote groups
−− the introduction of legal aid providers in court buildings so vulnerable litigants can obtain free
information and advice
−− the provision of paralegal services provided by women’s non-government organisations
(NGOs), and
−− the development of a series of legal aid handbooks and citizens’ guides to the law on family
law and birth certificate cases.
2
The policy reforms emanating from the research and introduced by the Supreme Court have had
a significant impact on the ability of women, the poor and those living in remote areas to access
the Religious Courts for their legal identity cases. In fact since 2009, the Religious Courts have:
−− doubled the number of cases heard at a circuit court
−− doubled the number of women bringing cases to the Religious Courts of Indonesia to more
than 250,000
−− more than tripled the number of marriage legalisation cases in Indonesia, and
−− quadrupled the number of court fees waived – a total of more than 12,000 in 2012.
The program has assisted with:
−− a major expansion of free legal aid services in courts across Indonesia, funded by the state.
By 2012, 189 General Courts and 69 Religious Courts had legal aid posts, supported by
228 legal aid organisations, and serving 42,505 clients in the General Courts and 55,860
in the Religious Courts
−− the introduction of PEKKA NGO paralegals to assist individuals with their family law and
legal identity matters. In 2014 they assisted more than 100,000 individuals in 19 provinces
to obtain legal identity documents, and
−− the provision of PEKKA NGO Legal Aid clinics (KLIK) at the village level. In six months this NGO
provided legal advisory services to more than 3800 individuals at village level, 85 per cent of
whom were women.
Access to the courts in family law and legal identity matters is critical to supporting broader human
rights for individuals. Guaranteeing people’s access to a legal identity is not only essential in order
to comply with human rights principles, but it is also a fundamental aspect of good governance
and inclusive development.
Legal identity goes beyond providing people with a piece of paper. Birth, marriage and divorce
certificates are a critical part of a modern civil registration and statistics system. The Constitutional
Court of Indonesia stated in a decision in 2013 (No 18/ PUU–XI/2013) that ‘a person without
a birth certificate does not exist in a legal sense in a state’. An unregistered child is in an
official state of non-existence. Legal identity is therefore fundamental to counting the number
of individuals every government is accountable for, in terms of delivering health, education,
social services and legal protection.
In Indonesia, the provision of a birth certificate document to a child with both the mother and
father’s name on it requires evidence of a legal marriage. In Indonesia, it is the courts that
undertake the task of legalising marriages – the Religious Courts for Muslims and the General
Courts for non-Muslims. It is only then that the other government agencies can issue a marriage
certificate and birth certificate.
Therefore, in Indonesia, the courts are central to removing the ‘official state of non-existence’
that millions of children in Indonesia currently face. All of the Family Court’s collaboration on
improving access to the courts for vulnerable groups supports this work.
For more information see Ten years of court-to-court partnership: assessing the impact of
Australian engagement on judicial reform in Indonesia, available at
http://www.aipj.or.id/en/news_media/general_stories_detail/ten-years-cooperation
IN FOCUS
Australia–Japan co-mediation program
The Hague Convention of 25 October 1980 on the Civil Aspects of International
Child Abduction (“1980 Convention”) entered into force between Japan and
Australia on 1 April 2014.
In October 2014, Justice Bennett travelled to Japan to attend a conference of the International
Bar Association and, while there, was involved in various meetings about the operation of the
1980 Hague Convention between Australia and Japan. Her Honour visited the Supreme Court of
Japan, where she met with Justice Okabe, a sitting Judge of that Court. Her Honour also met with
officers of the Family Bureau, including the director of the Bureau, Judge Kentaro Oka, to discuss
contact centres and enforcement of contact orders in Australia. Finally, Justice Bennett met with
the Japanese Central Authority, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Upon Justice Bennett’s return to Australia, her Honour began to put together a proposal to build
a family law mediation and electronic access resource between Japan and Australia. Working in
conjunction with members of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Japanese lawyers and Australian
legal practitioners with expertise in Hague matters, Justice Bennett (joined by Justice Benjamin)
created a proposal which was submitted to the Attorney-General’s Department as an application
for funding to create a system comprised of bi-national co-mediators and social scientists who
would be trained together in Japan; an online mediation service which would operate at little
or no expense to users; and an online supervised access service which would be affordable to
produce and use.
Image: Hague Convention Division, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 16 October 2014. From left: Matsuura Mie
(Case Worker), Yuta Yamasaki (Deputy Director), Satoshi Taketa (Deputy Director), Justice Bennett (Australia),
Kaoru Magosaki (Director), Yuri Yamazaki (Case Worker), Chie Maekoya (Case Worker), Takumi Kawano
(Deputy Director)
IN FOCUS
The overall objectives of the project are:
−− to establish an integrated system for use in international child abduction and access cases
between Japan and Australia, and
−− to enable children whose parents live across international borders to know both their parents
where it is in the child’s best interests to do so, in an atmosphere of enhanced awareness by
each country of the other country’s laws, cultural values and social conventions.
In March 2015, funding to send an Australian delegation to Japan for co-mediation training was
approved by the Attorney-General’s Department.
The delegation has now been finalised and will travel to Japan in September 2015 for the training.
The Australian participants are:
−− The Honourable Justice Robert Benjamin AM (Family Court of Australia)
−− Dr Ben Jones (Family Court of Australia / Federal Circuit Court of Australia)
−− Ms Paule Eckhaus (Family Court of Australia / Federal Circuit Court of Australia)
−− Ms April O’Mara (Family Court of Australia / Federal Circuit Court of Australia)
−− Ms Deborah Fry (Family Court of Australia / Federal Circuit Court of Australia)
−− Ms Freia Carlton (Victoria Legal Aid)
−− Mr Walter Ibbs (Victoria Legal Aid)
−− Ms Jill Raby (Victoria Legal Aid)
−− Ms Lynette Hill (Legal Aid Western Australia)
−− Ms Helen Freris (International Social Service)
−− Ms Kay Hardefeldt (International Social Service)
−− Ms Mary Louise Hatch (Relationships Australia Victoria)
−− Ms Amanda Humphreys (Kennedy Partners)
−− Mr Maurice Edwards (Watts McCray Lawyers).
The training will be conducted by Eberhard Carl, former International Hague Network Judge
and Judge of the Regional Superior Court at Frankfurt/Main, Germany; and Sybille Kiesewetter,
a psychologist, mediator and trainer who co-edited the handbook Cross-Border Family Mediation:
International Parental Child Abduction, Custody and Access Cases (Wolfgang Metzner Verlag,
2nd ed, 2014).
The Australia–Japan co-mediation program will lead the world, serving as a pilot project to assist
bilateral processes between other Asian states using the structure we are creating as a broad
geopolitical resource.