PDF 0.4 MB

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Recurrent expenditure less income A number of factors affect a jurisdiction’s expenditure and income, including the volume and type of work undertaken. In some jurisdictions, court fees (which are part of income) are set by government and not by court administrators, and some jurisdictions apportion expenditure between their criminal and civil courts. Total recurrent expenditure by Australian, State and Territory court authorities (excluding the High Court) was approximately $1.1 billion in 2003-04 (table 6.1). Nationally, court administration expenditure for the states and territories in that year was higher in the criminal jurisdiction of the supreme, district/county and magistrates courts ($454.1 million) than in the civil jurisdiction of those courts ($431.3 million minus $74.5 million for Australian courts, or $356.8 million). The coroners court expenditure was $31.5 million in 2003-04, while the electronic court expenditure and probate court expenditure were $17.5 million and $2.8 million respectively (table 6.1). In the Australian courts jurisdiction, recurrent expenditure in 2003-04 was $108.3 million for the Family Court of Australia, $74.5 million for the Federal Court of Australia and $32.3 million for the Federal Magistrates Court (table 6.1). Total income (excluding fines) by Australian, State and Territory court authorities (excluding the High Court) was $261.8 million in 2003-04 (table 6.1). Income was $140.0 million in the civil courts, $11.6 million in the criminal courts and $66.8 million in electronic courts. Income from probate was $24.1 million nationally. In the Australian courts jurisdiction, income was $11.3 million for the Federal Magistrates Court, $5.1 million for the Family Court of Australia and $7.1 million for the Federal Court of Australia (table 6.1). Total recurrent expenditure less income (excluding fines) by Australian, State and Territory court authorities (excluding the High Court) was $831.2 million in 2003-04. Nationally, court administration expenditure less income for the states and territories was higher in the criminal jurisdiction of the supreme, district/county and magistrates courts ($442.5 million) than in the civil jurisdiction of those courts ($291.3 million minus $67.4 million, or $223.9 million). The coroners court expenditure less income was $30.4 million, while both the probate registries and electronic courts had greater income than expenditure during 2003-04 (by $21.4 million and $49.3 million respectively) (table 6.1). In the Australian courts jurisdiction, recurrent expenditure less income was $103.1 million for the Family Court of Australia, $67.4 million for the Federal Court of Australia and $21.0 million for the Federal Magistrates Court (table 6.1). 6.10 REPORT ON GOVERNMENT SERVICES 2005
Table 6.1 Court administration recurrent expenditure less income (excluding fines), 2003-04 ($ million) a, b, c, d NSW Vic Qld WA SA Tas ACT NT Aust courts Total Court administration recurrent expenditure Civil courts e, f 139.5 74.7 46.9 42.4 30.4 4.2 8.5 10.2 74.5 431.3 Criminal courts g 159.7 90.0 76.2 59.9 41.0 11.2 7.1 9.1 .. 454.1 Electronic courts .. 1.6 8.6 3.7 3.7 .. .. .. .. 17.5 Family courts f .. .. .. 15.3 .. .. .. .. 108.3 123.6 Federal Magistrates h .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 32.3 32.3 Coroners courts 7.8 4.7 6.8 4.3 4.0 0.6 2.4 0.8 .. 31.5 Probate — supreme i 1.5 0.5 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 .. 2.8 Total 308.6 171.5 138.5 125.7 79.4 16.0 18.1 20.1 215.0 1 093.1 Court administration income (excluding fines) Civil courts e, f 64.4 29.5 17.9 9.4 7.6 1.2 2.4 0.6 7.1 140.0 Criminal courts g 5.2 0.0 0.9 3.1 1.5 0.4 0.5 0.1 .. 11.6 Electronic courts j .. 26.9 19.7 10.5 9.8 .. .. .. .. 66.8 Family courts f .. .. .. 1.6 .. .. .. .. 5.1 6.7 Federal Magistrates .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 11.3 11.3 Coroners courts 0.2 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 Probate — supreme 15.0 3.6 0.0 2.3 2.7 0.2 0.3 0.0 0.0 24.1 Total k 84.8 60.0 39.3 27.0 21.5 1.8 3.3 0.7 23.5 261.8 Court administration recurrent expenditure less income (excluding fines) Civil courts e, f 75.1 45.3 29.0 33.0 22.8 3.0 6.1 9.5 67.4 291.3 Criminal courts g 154.5 90.0 75.3 56.7 39.5 10.8 6.6 9.0 .. 442.5 Electronic courts j .. –25.3 –11.1 –6.8 –6.1 .. .. .. .. –49.3 Family courts f .. .. .. 13.7 .. .. .. .. 103.1 116.8 Federal Magistrates h .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 21.0 21.0 Coroners courts 7.7 4.7 6.0 4.2 4.0 0.6 2.4 0.8 .. 30.4 Probate — supreme i –13.5 –3.2 0.0 –2.0 –2.3 –0.1 –0.3 0.0 .. –21.4 Total j 223.9 111.5 99.2 98.8 57.9 14.2 14.8 19.4 191.5 831.2 a Totals may not sum as a result of rounding. b Income is derived from court fees, library revenue, court reporting revenue, sheriff and bailiff revenue, probate revenue, mediation revenue, rental income and any other sources of revenue (excluding fines). c District/county courts do not operate in Tasmania, the ACT or the NT. The Australian courts do not operate district/county or supreme courts. d Payroll tax is excluded. e Includes data for the supreme, district/county and magistrates courts (including children’s courts), and the Federal Court of Australia. Excludes data for the probate, family courts and the Federal Magistrates Court. f The data for the Family Court of Australia includes the ‘free’ allocation of Family Court resources to the Federal Magistrates Court. Data for the Federal Court include the cost of resources provided free of charge to the Federal Magistrates Court. g Includes data for supreme, district/county and magistrates courts (including children’s courts). Excludes data for the electronic and coroners courts. h The Federal Magistrates Court expenditure data includes resources received free of charge from the Federal Court. i The full cost of probate may not be identified, because rent or depreciation may be included under general supreme court figures. j NSW, Tasmania, the ACT and the NT do not include income from electronic courts. These jurisdictions’ debt recovery offices (or the equivalent) are not part of the justice or attorney-general’s department. .. Not applicable. Source: Australian, State and Territory court administration authorities and departments (unpublished); tables 6A.9–6A.13. COURT ADMINISTRATION 6.11
Page 1 and 2: 6 Court administration This chapter
Page 3 and 4: Box 6.1 Criminal Magistrates court
Page 5 and 6: Box 6.3 Criminal Supreme court juri
Page 7 and 8: licence cancellation), asset seizur
Page 9: Figure 6.1 Major relationships of c
Page 13 and 14: Figure 6.2 Distribution of court ad
Page 15 and 16: deaths and fires in the coroners co
Page 17 and 18: proportion of criminal matters lodg
Page 19 and 20: Table 6.6 Court finalisations — c
Page 21 and 22: As shown in figure 6.3, there are n
Page 23 and 24: Table 6.7 Average civil court fees
Page 25 and 26: distribution of cases may vary acro
Page 27 and 28: Table 6.9 Backlog indicator — the
Page 29 and 30: In each of the courts, the second n
Page 31 and 32: Table 6.12 Backlog indicator — th
Page 33 and 34: In the civil jurisdiction, the aver
Page 35 and 36: Table 6.15 Judicial officers, full
Page 37 and 38: Table 6.17 Clearance rate (finalisa
Page 39 and 40: Efficiency — cost per finalisatio
Page 41 and 42: Box 6.14 The impact of the electron
Page 43 and 44: Figure 6.6 Net expenditure per fina
Page 45 and 46: Figure 6.8 Net expenditure per fina
Page 47 and 48: of Australia, which has implication
Page 49 and 50: “ New South Wales Government comm
Page 51 and 52: “ Queensland Government comments
Page 53 and 54: “ South Australian Government com
Page 55 and 56: “ Australian Capital Territory Go
Page 57 and 58: 6.6 Definitions of key terms and in
Page 59 and 60: Method of finalisation Method of in

PDF 0.4 MB

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?