Open PDF - Self represented Litigants a challenge - Size 786 KB

FAMILY COURT OF AUSTRALIA
48
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
McKenzie’s friend should be able to do more when in court - should be
able to speak for the party. Too hard to manage the hearing process when
you are so emotionally involved. Not in the interests of the children to be
unable to present the case.
Different processes and timeframes in different courts are a problem.
Ex-partners are represented and SRLs get no help. Assumption by the other
side that an SRL is stupid. In fact other side was not ready when it came to
court.
Too much time spent waiting around.
It is a daunting challenge to represent oneself. The adversarial system is the
problem. It should be an absolutely last resort.
Comments on impact of AVOs on access to mediation, impact of consent
without admissions. Advice of a lawyer re this found subsequently to have
significant detriment to case. Needs to be quick follow up to resolve the
AVO. This does not help get an harmonious outcome.
In the courtroom, the judicial officer needs to make it clear to an SRL when
they will get a say (magistrates do this).
Problems also arise after the case. Orders made should specify the reasons
and pick up specifically on matters that were clearly in issue. Not doing
this can lead to problems with contraventions later – especially in the
absence of good will.
Three SRLs felt they had done well out of representing themselves.
Court appointed experts – an order to share the cost – need to know the
cost in advance. Also an issue about the quality of the report and avenues
for complaint. Not a good service but had been recommended by legal aid.
Court and parties should be aware of the content prior to the day in court.
Order for a child representative – should be made clear who will pay. No
clear understanding of the requirements of legal aid – it was not made clear
that the parties have a choice about paying if they are not in a position to.
FCoA could provide more information on this at the time of making the
order.
At hearings there is a perception of bias towards the represented party.
Negative reaction to self-representatives – comments and body language
need to be addressed.
Too much delay to resolution of an application – particularly with respect
to contravention applications. Took the initiative of asking the child rep to
convene a conference sooner than the hearing date. Has been agreed to.
There is too much capacity to frustrate the process.