Federal Court User Group Liaison
Committee - NSW - Minutes
08 March 2002
Present:
Justice Branson, Federal Court of Australia (Convenor)
Justice Tamberlin, Federal Court of Australia
Justice Emmett, Federal Court of Australia
John Mathieson, (District Registrar) Federal Court of
Australia
Malcolm Oakes SC, (Representative) NSW Bar Association
Peter Johnstone, (Representative) Law Society of NSW
Pieter Oomens, (Representative) Law Society of NSW
Ian Tunstall, (Representative) Law Society of NSW
1. Welcome
and introduction
Justice Branson welcomed all participants and thanked
the Law Society of NSW for its initiative in suggesting
that this committee be established. Each of the participants
gave a brief outline of their professional experience.
2. Terms of Reference
The draft terms of reference (set out below for convenience)
which had been circulated prior to the meeting were adopted.
Terms
of Reference
To provide a mechanism
for Judges and the District Registrar of the NSW Registry
of the Federal Court to meet with representatives of
the NSW Bar Association and the Law Society of NSW:
To discuss existing
or emerging issues of concern to the Court or the legal
profession relating to the operations of the Court in
NSW or its practice and procedure;
To provide a channel
for professional communication between the Court and
the legal profession in relation to the day to day work
of the Court in NSW;
To discuss proposals
for development and implementation in the NSW Registry
of the Court of new or changed procedures or systems;
and
To share information
relevant to the Court’s operation in NSW.
3. Frequency and structure
of future meetings
Justice Branson indicated that
it was the Federal Court’s intention that one or
two of the Judicial Members of the Committee would rotate
each year. The Representatives of each of the Bar Association
and the Law Society noted that their appointments to the
Committee were for the current year only with each Association
to reappoint or make fresh appointments, as each considered
appropriate from year to year.
After discussion it was agreed:
there was a need to provide an appropriate
mix of continuity and fresh blood in the Committee’s
membership;
the anticipated rotation/reappointment
or fresh appointments should provide this adequately
that meetings should be held quarterly;
that in 2002 the most convenient
day for meetings was Thursday commencing at 4.30 pm
for approximately 1 hour but never to proceed beyond
6 pm;
provisionally that 3 further meetings
would be held in 2002 on the first Thursdays in each
of June, September and December;
John Mathieson to circulate to all
members an invitation to indicate unavailability for
any of the provisional meeting times as well as suggested
alternatives so that final meeting dates can be fixed;
that once fixed those times would
become final;
it will be preferable to establish
some standing agenda items such as “Individual
Docket System”, “issues/concerns”, “suggestions”
and/or “Duty Judge System”;
further consideration to standing
agenda items will be given at the next meeting and members
will be invited to nominate in advance suggestions for
consideration at that meeting.
4. Recent or currently proposed initiatives of the Federal
Court:
* Electronic filing
and eCourt ‘on line’ directions hearings
Justice Tamberlin provided an overview of the electronic
filing facility which has established on the Court’s
Homepage and the use which the Court has been making
of “online” directions hearings. John Mathieson
provided the Representatives of the Bar Association
and Law Society with copies of “Powerpoint”
slides showing the screens in the Court’s electronic
filing facility and provided a brief overview of how
a user would go about filing a document electronically
as well as how it is processed in the Court and returned.
He also provided the Representatives with copies of
information about the eCourt “Online” forum,
including a copy of the protocol which the Court requires
practitioners using this form adhere to. In discussion
it was suggested:
as each of these new facilities
would require practitioners to print documents it would
be important that the Federal Court’s costs scale
made an appropriate allowance for this;
that these facilities would be particularly
useful for country practitioners dealing with the Court;
that there was very limited knowledge,
as far as the professional bodies Representatives were
aware of these facilities;
awareness and in turn adoption of
these facilities could best be increased by providing
demonstrations to practitioners;
both the professional bodies
would be prepared to assist the Court in arranging demonstrations
to their members.
*
Harmonised Bankruptcy Rules
John Mathieson noted that the Chief Justice of the
Federal Court and the Chief Federal Magistrate had
agreed that draft "harmonised" bankruptcy
rules be developed for consideration by the Judges
and Federal Magistrates as common bankruptcy rules
to be applied in both courts in substitution for the
existing separate bankruptcy rules. He outlined the
progress made to date in the development of the draft
and the further steps which would be required before
such rules could, if adopted, become operative.
* Review of the Individual
Docket System
Justice Branson noted that when
adopting its Individual Docket System the Court proposed
to conduct a review of its operation after an appropriate
settling in time. The Court had intended to use an external
body before this evaluation however has recently decided
that this will not be suitable and is now looking at
how this review might be done. She said the Court is
looking for suggestions on this as well as feedback
from the profession on the system, what has worked well,
what has not worked as well and what changes might be
made to improve its operation. Justice Tamberlin said
that one suggestion that has been made is to set a hearing
date at an early stage after commencement of proceedings
so that parties have a definite timetable to work to
and asked if the professional bodies could consider
this and provide feedback to the Court. Justice Branson
said that one of the potentially adverse implications
of the Federal Court having introduced a system like
the Individual Docket System is that practitioners could
abrogate their responsibility for management of cases,
leave this solely to the Court and just do what the
Court asked them to do. She asked for feedback from
the professional bodies on this. Malcolm Oakes said
that feedback from the profession generally to the Law
Council about the operation across the Court of the
Individual Docket System was that that system was working
very well in New South Wales. Pieter Oomens suggested
that multiple direction hearings "keep people honest".
It was agreed that comments and
suggestions on the operation of the Individual Docket
System would be discussed at the next meeting and
(as mentioned above) discussion of the system would
be considered for a standing agenda item for Committee
meetings.
*
Corporations Law
Justices Branson and Emmett outlined the Corporations
Law arrangements, which the Court has had in operation
since its jurisdiction in this area was returned to
it on 15 July 2001, as well as a proposal under consideration
to change the duty judge arrangements so that urgent
applications would, in ordinary business hours, go
direct to the Duty Judge's chambers. If the latter
were adopted, it is also proposed that in specialist
panel cases the duty judge (if not a member of the
relevant panel) could refer the urgent application,
if it involved a specialised issue, to a judge who
was a panel member and who could deal with that application
with appropriate expedition. Practitioners would be
invited to ask the duty judge to do this in appropriate
circumstances. The Court will be consulting with the
professional bodies in its consideration of any possible
change to the Corporations Law Judge and Panel and
its consideration of new duty judge arrangements.
