View Part 2 - Overview of the Court (PDF Size - 305 KB)

Overview of the courtPart 2

Overview of the court Part 210Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

GENERAL OVERVIEWThe Family Court of Australia, through its specialist judges and staff, helps Australiansresolve their most complex family disputes.Presently, the Court is funded to provide two outputs:Resolution (measured by mediated agreements and consent orders) andDetermination (measured by interim orders, final orders, appeals and divorces).The resolution output continues to reflect the fact that, in the past, the Family Courthas invested significantly in resolving disputes through the work of its mediators (nowfamily consultants) and registrars. The Annual Report 2006-07, in particular the Reporton Court Performance in Part 3, continues to detail the Court’s progress against thosestated outputs during the reporting year.However, the function of the Court has evolved as a result of reforms to the Family LawAct and the wider family law system. These family law reforms enable the Family Courtto focus its resources increasingly on the determination of the most complex familylaw disputes in Australia. The reforms to date have established 40 out of a proposed65 Family Relationship Centres and increased access to alternative family relationshipservices in the community. This began in June 2006 and continues. From 1 July 2007 itis mandatory to access these services before a person can make a court application. Inaddition, the expansion of the Federal Magistrates Court’s capacity to manage the lesscomplex family law cases has continued. This change of focus for the Court has beenadvanced during 2006-07 with the implementation of the Less Adversarial Trial for allnew cases in the Family Court and the implementation of the Child Responsive Programduring 2007. The ongoing refinement of the Combined Registry with the FederalMagistrates Court has also contributed to this development.Part 2Overview of the courtThe Family Court of Australia’s place in the family law system is as Australia’s specialistsuperior court in family law. Its purpose is to:determine cases with complex law, facts and parties;cover specialised areas, such as applications pursuant to the Hague Conventionon International Child Abduction, special medical procedures, and internationalrelocation; andprovide national coverage as the appellate court in family law matters.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200711

GOVERNANCEThe Chief Justice is responsible for managing the administrative affairs of the Court(section 38A Family Law Act 1975) assisted by the Chief Executive Officer (section 38B).Overview of the court Part 2The Chief Executive Officer’s powers are broad (section 38D), although subject todirections from the Chief Justice (section 38D(3)). The Chief Executive Officer holdsthe responsibilities and powers of an agency head under Commonwealth financialmanagement and public service legislation. By delegation from the Chief Justice,Regional Coordinating Judges assist in administering judicial functions in particularareas, such as case management.There is a balance of powers and responsibilities across management and the judiciary.The Chief Justice has maintained a collegiate style of governance and the judges meetonce or twice yearly in plenary. In addition, judges and staff participate in a number ofcommittees that develop policies across a range of matters.The Chief Justice’s Policy Advisory Committee (CJPAC), which meets quarterly, advisesthe Chief Justice on policy matters. The Rules Committee also meets quarterly.The Court also has a number of other standing committees that generally meet bytelephone on a regular basis or as required, out of court hours. They are:Costs CommitteeCultural Diversity CommitteeElectronic Benchbook CommitteeFamily Violence CommitteeInformation and Communication Technology CommitteeJudgment Publication CommitteeLaw Reform CommitteeLibrary CommitteeNational Case Management Judicial CommitteeNational Magellan Stakeholder CommitteeProfessional Development CommitteeProperty Management CommitteeResearch and Ethics CommitteeSelf Represented Litigants CommitteeStrategic Communications CommitteeDuring the year there was also an ad hoc committee which provided policy advice tothe Chief Justice in relation to case management following the decision to implementthe less adversarial trial model to all matters in the Court. The work of the CaseManagement Policy and Procedure Committee is expected to be completed before theend of 2007.12Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

More information on any significant outputs from these committees appears inAppendix 2.The Court Management Group, comprising the Chief Executive Officer and othersenior executive staff, is responsible for implementing the Court’s strategic direction.Operational management is devolved to registries where regional registry managerswork closely with judges to deliver court services to families in dispute.In 2004-05 the Family Law Courts Board was established, comprising the Chief Justiceof the Family Court, the Chief Federal Magistrate of the Federal Magistrates Court andthe Chief Executive Officers of each court. This Board oversees the coordination andmanagement, and makes decisions about the shared arrangements between the twocourts.FINANCIAL OVERVIEWThe Family Court of Australia is a prescribed agency under the Financial Managementand Accountability Act 1997.The Court’s 2006-07 budget, as published in the Portfolio Additional EstimatesStatements, was $139.1m. Figure 2.1 (below) provides a further breakdown of thebudget which indicates that the Court has a significant component of fixed costs (54%)relating to property, judicial officers and support and depreciation.Part 2Overview of the courtThe Court has reported a small loss of $0.159m for the 2006-07 financial year comparedto a break-even result forecast in the Portfolio Budget Statement and Portfolio BudgetAdditional Estimates.The Court currently provides resources free of charge to the FMC in accordance withsections 90, 92 and 99 of the Federal Magistrates Act 1999. These free resources includethe work of court staff for the FMC and accommodation, including access to courtrooms. The Court estimates that the cost of resources provided free of charge to theFMC during 2006-07 was $16.46m.In addition, the Court provides further shared services, including informationtechnology services, accommodation, the work of court staff (family consultants,registrars and registry services) and the related depreciation and amortisation.The Court is currently working with the FMC to agree the costs of shared services in orderto transfer the resources or an agreed amount to the FMC. This will enable accountabilityand control of those resources to more appropriately reside with the FMC.An initial transfer of $1.575m, for 100 per cent FMC court space usage, occurred in the2007–08 Federal Budget with the balance to occur as part of the 2008–09 FederalBudget.The chart following indicates those services which are presently being provided free ofcharge to the FMC.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200713

Figure 2.1 Chart of Family Court Expenditure & Shared with FMCVariableFixedShared ResourcesOverview of the court Part 2CorporateSupport, 3%CorporateOverheads, 6%InformationTechnologyServices, 6%ClientServices, 19%FamilyConsultants, 7%Registrars, 5%LegendJudges &SupportJudicialRegistrars &SupportDepreciationPropertyRegistrarsFamilyConsultantsClient ServicesCorporateSupportInformationTechnologyServicesCorporateOverheadsJudges &Support, 21%JudicialRegistrars &Support, 1%Depreciation,5%Property, 27%CorporateSupportCorporateOverheadsInformationTechnologyServicesClientServicesFamilyConsultantsRegistrarsAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to judges and their support staffAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to Judicial Registrars and theirsupport staffAll depreciation, amortisation and other expenses associated with asset movementsLease Rentals for Commonwealth Law Courts and Leased Premises, and all PropertyOperating Expenses (such as cleaning, energy, repairs and maintenance, andmanagement fees) associated with these premises.All employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to RegistrarsAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to Family ConsultantsAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to Client Service staffJudges &SupportJudicialRegistrars &SupportDepreciationAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to Finance, Human Resources,Property Services, Contract Services, and the Chief Executive OfficerPropertyAll employee and supplier expenses directly attributed to the provision of InformationTechnology ServicesWorkers Compensation and Com Cover Insurance Premiums, Fringe Benefit TaxExpenditure, ComSuper Management Fees, Legal and Audit Fees, Corporate SalaryOverheads attributed to Registry Management, Corporate Support and IT Services Staff,and Expenditure related to project activity in the Court (some of which is externallyfunded).14Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

INITIATIVES OF THE FAMILY COURT AND THE FEDERALMAGISTRATES COURTCOMBINED REGISTRY PROGRAMThe Combined Registry Project of the Family Court and the FMC commenced in July2004 to simplify access to the family law system.The five key objectives of the project are to:reduce confusion for clients through a single point of filing and through introductionof a common form;reduce the number of times clients need to attend court and ensure each event addsvalue and progresses the case towards a conclusion;provide earlier access to a judicial officer;provide a single entry point within the FMC for much of the filing; andprovide services that make the process more timely, including improving thecommunity perception of both Courts.Key achievements of the project during 2006-07 include:The Combined Initiating Application commenced as a pilot on 8 January 2007and concluded on 30 June 2007, following many months of consultation betweenthe Courts. An evaluation of the application was conducted and a report will beprovided to the Family Law Courts Board in late 2007.A single hard copy file cover was introduced on 1 January 2007, allowing parties tofile all documents together regardless of in what court the matter is listed. Casetrack,the case management system for both Courts, provides the required singlenumbering regime. The changes enable Court staff and the judiciary to view andwork on applications from both Courts without changing jurisdictions.A Streaming Model is to be piloted in the Adelaide registry from 2 July 2007. Themodel anticipates the filing of most family law applications in the FMC and setsout the process to be trialled in managing intake of applications and transfers tothe Family Court. The model was the outcome of a workshop involving AdelaideFamily Court judges, federal magistrates, representatives from the legal profession,the Attorney-General’s Department and Court staff. A joint steering committee hasbeen established to oversee the implementation and the conduct of the pilot. Thesteering committee reports to the Family Law Courts Board.The updated and improved intranet site for the Family Court, and the new site for theFMC, were launched as part of this program in October 2006. Development involvedextensive consultation with the judiciary and staff of each Court.Part 2Overview of the courtBack to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200715

NATIONAL ENQUIRY CENTREIn order to provide a better telephone and email service to clients contacting the FamilyCourt and the FMC, the National Enquiry Centre (NEC) was established in April 2006 aspart of the Combined Registry Program. The NEC is able to answer many queries andonly diverts calls to a registry where necessary. This reduces the number of callerstransferred which only occurs if they need another specific service.Overview of the court Part 2The NEC aims to provide a quality service to clients. Its service benchmarks are:80% of calls are answered within 90 seconds,less than 5% of calls abandoned,less than 10% of calls transferred to a Family Law registry,100% of emails answered within 7 days, and100% of requests for divorce certificates processed and sent within 3 working daysof receipt.Of the calls received by the NEC only 8% require a transfer to a Family Law registry,approximately 5% are referred to the Family Relationships Advice Line or other externalservice provider, 1% are transferred to the Federal Court of Australia, and 3% require theassistance of other Courts, eg. local courts and the Family Court of Western Australia.The Manager National Enquiry Centre at workThe effectiveness of the NEC was evaluatedby an external consultant during 2006-07. Thereview concluded that the centre provides a costeffective, reliable, timely and client focussed firstpoint of electronic contact for clients of bothCourts. The evaluation further illustrated thatthis services provides a highly visible, nationallyintegrated and seamless telephone service,ensures uniformity of approach and consistencyin response to general family law telephone andemail enquiries. 11 See Part 6 for more information on the evaluation outcomes.16Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

INITIATIVES OF THE FAMILY COURT, FEDERAL COURT ANDFEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURTONLINE ACCESS BY LAW FIRMS (Commonwealth Courts Portal)The Commonwealth Courts Portal is a joint project of the Family Court, Federal Court,and the FMC. The vision of the ‘Portal’ is to provide the external community, lawyers andlitigants with a single entry point or ‘gateway’ to a broad range of court services. ThePortal delivers access for lawyers and litigants to their own court records in Casetrack bylogging on using a single secure ID and password. They can obtain information aboutthe cases in which their firm is involved. This includes:a list of all documents filed in their matter (including date filed and by whom thedocument was filed);details of past and future court dates;details of court outcomes and orders made; anda list of all matters in the court for their firm.Law firms can internally manage access permission for their staff and the barristers theybrief. Each staff member can then access the specific files they need. The Portal allowsusers to keep track of their own case load using a ‘bookmarks’ feature, and check allup-coming events in a diary view.Part 2Overview of the courtThe three Commonwealth jurisdictions have adopted a common case managementsystem, Casetrack, which has facilitated taking this next collaborative step. The projectwill start in August 2007.INITIATIVES OF THE FAMILY COURTCHILDREN’S CASES PROGRAM /LESS ADVERSARIAL TRIALDivision 12A of Part VII of the Family Law Act commenced on 1 July 2006, enabling whatwas the Children’s Cases Program (CCP) to become the Family Court’s model for a LessAdversarial Trial (LAT) to be applied to all new ‘child related proceedings’ in the FamilyCourt, without the need for consent of the parties. 2In September 2006 a national judges meeting endorsed the application of the LATapproach to all new family law cases (including financial cases), to commence beforethe end of 2007. The required new case management pathway to implement thisdecision is being developed by the Court’s Case Management Policy and ProcedureCommittee for consideration of all judges in August 2007. The LAT will then become theway in which the Family Court of Australia conducts all cases.2 See Part 6 for information on evaluations of the CCP.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200717

Overview of the court Part 2From the launch of Finding a Better WayCHILD RESPONSIVE PROGRAMIn recognition of the significance of the reformsthat LAT represents the Court published Findinga Better Way: A bold departure from the traditionalcommon law approach to the conduct of legalproceedings in April 2007. This publication is anaccount of the decisions taken to commence thepilot and the reasons for them, as well as of theexperience of CCP. It also marked the conclusionof the first stage of the reform process — fromthe vision through to implementation — andcommencement of the second stage, putting itinto daily practice.In response to the changes to the family law framework, particularly the establishmentof Family Relationship Centres and the introduction of compulsory dispute resolutionbefore filing, the Court has changed the role of its family consultants. This is in line withthe Court’s aim to provide a quality service which directly supports judicial decisionmaking,without duplicating services in the community. The Court has developedand tested a new model of family consultants working with child disputes, called theChild Responsive Program (CRP). Each case has a family consultant allocated to it.This provides continuity of family consultant through to trial and post-trial follow upand referral, where this is required. 3 CRP aims to include children early in the process,providing an opportunity to put forward their views and to focus parents on theirneeds. CRP is designed to integrate and align with less adversarial (child related) trialproceedings and to enable what occurs during the program to be admissible in court.The CRP provides the parties with the following:Intake and assessment meeting;Child and family conference with potential for child involvement, depending on thefamily consultant’s assessment;Selective settlement meeting;Oral report to the Court on first day of trial, if the matter has not settled;A Full Family Report if required; andPost orders follow up.Following the successful pilot in Melbourne and the evaluation by Dr Jennifer McIntosh,CRP was implemented in selected rural and regional registries, including Cairns,Townsville, Canberra, Dubbo, Hobart, Launceston and Lismore.3 An evaluation was designed and conducted by Dr. Jenn McIntosh (Child Responsive Program Evaluation Report,McIntosh & Long, September, 2006). See Part 6 for more information on the outcomes of this evaluation.18Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

Following the success of the CRP pilot, the Court received additional funding from theGovernment in the 2007-08 Budget to implement the program nationally. The CRP willbe implemented throughout the Court in 2007-08.MAGELLANThe Magellan project pilot commenced in the Melbourne registry of the Family Court inmid 1998 and has now been implemented in all States and Territories. In NSW, however,it is limited (by direction from the Department of Children’s Services) to certainpostcodes in the South West Sydney area.Magellan involves special case management of cases in which there are seriousallegations of sexual or physical abuse of a child. Once a Magellan case is identifiedit is managed by a designated small team consisting of a judge, registrar and familyconsultant. Magellan case management relies on a collaborative and highly coordinatedset of processes and procedures. A crucial aspect is strong inter-agency coordination,in particular with State and Territory child protection agencies, which ensures thatproblems are dealt with efficiently and that information sharing is of high quality. Anindependent children’s lawyer is appointed in every Magellan case.As a result of the legislative changes which commenced on 1 July 2006, the FamilyCourt introduced a prescribed (mandatory) form to be used in two situations. One,when allegations of child abuse or risk of child abuse are made and a prescribed childwelfare authority must be notified of the allegations (Section 67Z of the Family Law Act1975). The other when a person alleges that there has been abuse of a child, or familyviolence, or there is a risk of abuse of a child or family violence, and the allegation isrelevant to whether the court should grant or refuse the application (Section 60K of theFamily Law Act 1975). This form is a ‘trigger’ for identifying Magellan cases early in thecourt process.Part 2Overview of the courtThere have been a total of 734 Magellan cases since the introduction of this casemanagement process. 4MENTAL HEALTH SUPPORT, FAMILY VIOLENCE SCREENING AND CULTURALDIVERSITY (the Integrated Client Service Delivery Program)During the year the Court combined a number of client service related developmentactivities into the one Integrated Client Service Delivery Program (ICSDP). Each of thepre-existing projects was aiming to understand and better meet the needs of clients.At the same time the Government is pursuing a ‘whole of government’ approach topolicy and service delivery that emphasises integration between agencies and strongerpartnerships with the community sector. The aim of the ICSDP was to formally combinethe pre-existing projects into a single, coordinated effort and to ensure that they areincorporated and embedded into the Court’s core service delivery.4 See Part 6 for information on the external evaluation of this project.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200719

The Mental Health Support Project (MHSP) commenced by the development ofa program pilot, funded under the Department of Health and Ageing’s NationalSuicide Prevention Strategy ($300,000). The program was tested and evaluated inAdelaide and Darwin.Overview of the court Part 2As an integral part of the Court’s Family Violence Strategy, a screening and riskassessment pilot was successfully tested and evaluated at Brisbane Registry from thelast quarter of 2005 to April 2006.At the same time, other client service related initiatives in the Court were coming tofruition including those for special needs groups such as Aboriginal and Torres StraitIslander (ATSI) clients, as well as clients from Culturally and Linguistically Diversebackgrounds (CALD).These efforts underlined the need to direct more effort at reinforcing behaviours thatsupport clients and on client-focused service delivery. Staff awareness is increasedthrough specific training and organisational culture and capabilities are built upon,ensuring that staff see themselves as part of a broader public service.On 15 October, 2006 the Department of Health and Ageing, as part of its NationalSuicide Prevention Strategy, provided $950,000 to help the Family Court and theFederal Magistrates Court implement the MHSP nationally over the next two years.The Family Court of Australia committed a further $220,000 of its own funding in 2006-07, and $240,000 in 2007-08 to support the implementation of the full ICSD Programfunctionality. This is in on top of the commitment of significant salary costs andoperational overheads of the staff involved in the project.This program is the first of its kind in a court setting in Australia and is essential inproviding staff with the necessary skills to deal with mental health, cultural diversityand safety issues for clients attending court.The key elements of the program include:A whole-of-service skilling program that includes general client service training,mental health support for clients, security at court to help all clients (especially thoseexperiencing family violence) and responding to the needs of special client groupssuch as those with Indigenous or CALD backgrounds. The program is built on a bestpractice training approach consistent with the MHSP pilot, tailored materials for thejudiciary, registrars and family consultants, client service officers and general staffand for regionalised delivery.An integrated set of protocols to guide staff through different client events.Implementation of the protocols will include practical training during the skillingprogram and packaging to make the protocols more effective and easier to use.20Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

Implementing a national network of community based organisations able to takereferrals of clients seen as at risk. These referrals may be preventative, responsive oremergency referrals. If clients are on the phone they will be offered the option ofbeing warm-linked to a referral or counselling agency.Development of information and literature as appropriate for the integratedprogram.Integrated Client Service Delivery Program Training - ParramattaCULTURAL DIVERSITY – LIVING IN HARMONY INITIATIVEThe Integrated Client ServicesDelivery Program commencedits national implementation inNSW and the ACT in April 2007.Training will continue over otherlocations until the end of March2008.An external evaluation will beconducted to report in late 2008.Part 2Overview of the courtThe Court’s Living in Harmony Initiative, which focused on the needs of CALD clients,funded by the Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC), concluded in 2006.The final evaluation highlighted the success of the family law education strategiesdeveloped for new and emerging communities. The ongoing progress of this work hasnow been built into the ICSDP.The cultural diversity component of the ICSDP aims to address the following:1. Increase staff cultural awareness – by delivering cross-cultural training and educationto build staff confidence in working with clients from CALD backgrounds.2. Stakeholder management – the establishment of relationships with key externalstakeholders in CALD communities and support agencies and service providers.3. Reinforcement of behaviours that support clients – the development andimplementation of core competencies of client service protocols responsive toclients who are from CALD communities.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200721

OUTSIDE PARTICIPATIONThe Family Court has a number of strategies for strengthening its partnership withclients and other stakeholders within the family law system such as legal practitioners,non-government organisations and government agencies and departments.There are a number of ways in which external stakeholders may inform the Court andaffect Court processes. These include:Overview of the court Part 2The Family Law Council, established by the Attorney-General under section115 of the Family Law Act 1975, confers with Court personnel in the course of itsconsideration of particular aspects of family law. The Court also has membership ofthe Council and observers at its meetings.The Australian Institute of Family Studies (AIFS) was established under section114B of the Family Law Act 1975 and is a forum for exchange of information andresearch.The Chief Justice and the Deputy Chief Justice meet quarterly with the Family LawSection of the Law Council of Australia and there are regular liaison meetings withlocal law societies and bar associations in each of the Court’s registries.The Chief Justice chairs a national Family Law Forum which consists ofrepresentatives from the Federal Magistrates Court, the Family Law Council,the Family Law Section of the Law Council of Australia, National Legal Aid, theAttorney-General’s Department, the Department of Families, Community Servicesand Indigenous Affairs, the Child Support Agency, the AIFS, non-governmentorganisations and community legal centres. The Family Law Forum meets quarterlyto discuss shared issues arising within the family law system.Each registry of the Family Court has established similarly comprised consultativeprocesses which are effected through existing local stakeholder forums such aslegal practitioner forums, family law pathways networks and court user groups.These forums aim to achieve better outcomes for clients through facilitating locallyfocussed discussion. They have also provided a means to build effective referralrelationships to support the establishment of Family Relationship Centres.The Court has also developed networks with CALD communities through its CulturalDiversity Committee, and with mental health providers and advocates through itsMental Health Pilot Project.Individuals and organisations may also participate in the Court’s policy formulation bymaking representations in writing, either directly to the Court, through the Family LawCouncil or through community consultations conducted by the Court.22Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

PLANNINGIn response to the Government’s family law reform agenda, encompassing theintroduction of Family Relationship Centres, the continued expansion of the FMC,and reforms to the Family Law Act 1975, the Family Court has continued to review andreshape its strategic direction to support its core business.The Court aims to be recognised for its role as the specialist superior court in thefamily law system, dealing with the most complex cases. During the year the Court’sManagement Group examined its strategic direction in this context and confirmed thefollowing:The core services of the Family Court of Australia are those that:assist the judges to determine cases;meet duty of care requirements; and/orare prescribed by legislation.The Court provides enabling services to assist:the Chief Justice to govern the Court effectively;the Chief Executive to manage the Court effectively; andthe judges to determine cases.Part 2Overview of the courtThis reshaping strengthens the Court’s focus on judicial support while continuing toprovide the highest quality registry services to all family law stakeholders and clients.Achieving this will require ongoing appropriate adjustments to the Court’s resources asworkload shifts to the FMC.The Court has designed four programs of work to ensure that it fulfils its statedpurpose:1 maintaining an environment that enables judicial officers to make effectivedecisions;2 provision of effective and efficient client services;3 corporate management of resources; and4 effective information and communication technologies.The Court’s organisational structure is aligned to these four programs of work and theCourt’s core services.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200723

RISK MANAGEMENT, INTERNAL AUDIT AND FRAUD CONTROLThe Court has, as part of its corporate governance arrangements, appropriatemechanisms to manage general business risk as well as fraud risk.GENERAL BUSINESS RISKOverview of the court Part 2The Court promotes risk management at all levels of the organisation as a tool forensuring the efficient and effective operation of the Court. The Court’s approach to riskmanagement as per the Risk, Control, and Compliance Framework is consistent with theAustralian/New Zealand Risk Management Standard (AS/NZS 4360:2004).Business areas are encouraged to undertake risk assessments for business planningpurposes, significant project activity, procurement of property or services andcontracting purposes, and as a part of good business practice. The Risk Team withinthe Court provides specialist services to support the completion of risk managementactivities across the Court.The Court’s Chief Executive Instructions (CEIs) require that all staff be aware of theeffective management of risks and that risk assessments are conducted for annualbusiness plans and identified projects. In addition they are required prior to enteringinto contracts or purchasing, subject to appropriate cost-benefit analysis.During 2006-07 the Court’s Risk Team has refined the Risk, Control and ComplianceFramework into a single document to ensure all appropriate risk related information isreadily available to all staff.The Court conducts a strategic risk assessment on a bi-annual basis to identify areasof significant operational and financial risk. This risk assessment is used by the Court’sAudit Committee when considering the upcoming internal audit program. Thetreatment of identified risks is monitored via the Court’s risk register database.The Court has a risk-based internal audit program. The internal audit program isdetermined by the Audit Committee prior to the start of each financial year and isset out in the Annual Internal Audit Plan. The plan shows areas proposed for reviewduring the forthcoming year and is based on the assessment of the Court’s BusinessRisks. Risks are identified in consultation with the Court’s Senior Management Group.The Court maintains a database of all audits performed along with the findings andrecommendations made and progress against them.24Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

Internal audits/reviews conducted during the year were:GST, FBT and Salary Sacrifice AuditReceipting Controls AuditProject Management AuditTravel Policy ReviewHuman Resource Follow-up ReviewNational Enquiry Centre Operations AuditLearning and Development ReviewIT Disaster Recovery Planning AuditFRAUD PREVENTION AND CONTROLThe Court maintains a Fraud Control Plan in accordance with the requirements of theCommonwealth Fraud Control Guidelines 2002. The Court periodically reviews the planand fraud control framework to ensure that they reflect the business needs and theCourt’s operating environment. The Risk Team and Audit Committee have an ongoinginvolvement in the assessment of the Court’s fraud risks and the implementation ofappropriate fraud prevention, detection, investigation and reporting.The Court plans to review its current Fraud Control Plan in 2007-08. Strategies forraising awareness and fraud prevention measures as determined by this review will beimplemented by the Court over the coming years.Part 2Overview of the courtBack to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200725

ORGANISATIONAL STRUCUTRE OF THE FAMILY COURT OFAUSTRALIAORGANISATIONAL STRUCTURE CHART– 30 JUNE 2007Figure 2.2: Organisational Structure – 30 June 2007Overview of the court Part 2PrincipalRegistrarAngela FilippelloExecutive OfficerMario CattapanExecutive AdviserLeisha ListerDirector ChildDispute ServicesDianne GibsonChief JusticeHon Diana BryantChief Executive OfficerRichard FosterExecutive DirectorClient ServicesRichard OliverExecutive DirectorInformation,Communication &TechnologyStephen AndrewDeputy Chief JusticeHon John FaulksJudiciary and JudicialCommitteesLegal CounselNeil WarehamExecutive DirectorCorporateGrahame HarriottCoordinatingRegistrarsManagersChild DisputeServicesExecutiveAdviser toED CSSimon KelsoCommunicationsOfficeHumanResourcesRegistrarsFamilyConsultantsRegistriesApplicationsProperty &ContractsMarshal &SecurityServicesFamily LawInformationService (FLIS)FinanceNotes:Denotes Professional responsibilityRegistriesAdelaide, Albury, Alice Springs, Brisbane, Cairns, Canberra,Coffs Harbour, Dandenong, Darwin, Dubbo, Hobart,Launceston, Lismore, Melbourne, Newcastle, Parramatta,Rockhampton, Sydney, Townsville, WollongongInfrastructureStatisticsBudgets andBusinessImprovementsRiskManagementSystemsArchitect26Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

JUDGES AND JUDICIAL REGISTRARSAt the end of June 2007 there were 40 Judges of the Court including the Chief Justiceand Deputy Chief Justice.(Note: The date after the name of a judge in the following list is the date they wereappointed to the Family Court or FCWA.)CHIEF JUSTICEThe Honourable Justice Diana Bryant 05/07/2004DEPUTY CHIEF JUSTICEThe Honourable Justice John Faulks 12/10/1994JUDGES ASSIGNED TO APPEAL DIVISIONThe Honourable Chief Justice Diana BryantThe Honourable Deputy Chief Justice John FaulksThe Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine FinnThe Honourable Justice Joseph Victor KayThe Honourable Justice Ian Roy ColemanThe Honourable Justice Bernard John WarnickThe Honourable Justice Michelle MayThe Honourable Justice Jennifer Margaret BolandThe Honourable Justice Stephen Ernest Thackray (Chief JudgeFamily Court of Western Australia)Part 2Overview of the court* The Honourable Justice Michael Henry Holden, Chief Judge Family Court of Western Australia resigned hiscommission as a judge assigned to the Appeal Division on 30 June 2006.JUDGESAdelaideThe Honourable Justice Christine Elizabeth Dawe 03/03/1997(Regional Coordinating Judge, South Australia and Northern Territory)The Honourable Justice Rodney Keith Burr AM 02/04/1998The Honourable Justice Steven Strickland 22/11/1999Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200727

Overview of the court Part 2BrisbaneThe Honourable Justice Graham Rodney Bell 27/02/1976The Honourable Justice James Patrick O’Hara Barry 12/12/1983The Honourable Justice Bernard John Warnick 02/09/1991The Honourable Justice Brian Edward Jordan 26/07/1994The Honourable Justice Michelle May 05/09/1995The Honourable Justice Elizabeth Madonna O’Reilly 10/01/2003The Honourable Justice Timothy Francis Carmody 07/07/2003(Regional Coordinating Judge, Queensland)TownsvilleThe Honourable Justice Alexander Robert Monteith 28/11/2000MelbourneThe Honourable Justice Joseph Victor Kay 12/06/1986The Honourable Justice Nahum Mushin 26/10/1990(Regional Coordinating Judge, Victoria and Tasmania)The Honourable Justice Sally Elizabeth Brown AM 23/11/1993The Honourable Justice Linda Marion Dessau 20/06/1995The Honourable Justice Paul Marshall Guest 01/05/1998The Honourable Justice Heather Barbara Carter 01/06/1998The Honourable Justice Michael Raymond Brock Watt 14/12/1998The Honourable Justice Peter Young 26/08/2002The Honourable Justice Victoria Jane Bennett 30/11/2005The Honourable Justice Paul Cronin 20/12/2006HobartThe Honourable Justice Robert James Charles Benjamin 19/08/2005CanberraThe Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine Finn 02/07/1990SydneyThe Honourable Justice John Morris Cohen 01/02/1989The Honourable Justice Colleen Ann Moore 18/04/1991The Honourable Justice Stephen Richard O’Ryan 11/10/1994The Honourable Justice John Joseph Steele 01/12/1997The Honourable Justice Peter Isaac Rose 21/12/1998The Honourable Justice Jennifer Margaret Boland 29/10/1999The Honourable Justice Mark Frederick Le Poer Trench 10/10/2001The Honourable Justice Garry Allan Watts 14/04/200528Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

ParramattaThe Honourable Justice Ian Roy Coleman 18/04/1991The Honourable Justice Lloyd Dengate Stacy Waddy RFD 01/07/1998The Honourable Justice Robyn Sylvia Flohm 17/05/1999The Honourable Justice David John Collier 19/07/1999The Honourable Justice Janine Patricia Hazelwood Stevenson 18/05/2001NewcastleThe Honourable Justice Graham Robert Mullane 28/07/1986(Regional Coordinating Judge, New South Wales and Australian Capital Territory)The Honourable Justice Judith Maureen Ryan 31/07/2006JUDICIAL REGISTRARSAdelaideMr Andrew Alderman Forbes 15/02/1989BrisbaneMs Dianne Margaret Smith 11/10/1994Part 2Overview of the courtSydneyMr William Philip Johnston 22/01/1990Mr Ian James Loughnan 06/11/1995FAMILY COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA(Note: Judges of the Family Court of Western Australia also hold Commissions in theFamily Court of Australia)Chief JudgeThe Honourable Justice Stephen Ernest Thackray 01/12/2004JudgesThe Honourable Justice Carolyn Elvina Martin 19/11/1996The Honourable Justice Julienne Penny 09/06/1999The Honourable Justice Jane Crisford 14/12/2006Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200729

ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNALOverview of the court Part 2(Note: Some judges of the Family Court hold appointments in the AdministrativeAppeals Tribunal as Presidential Members)The Honourable Justice Mary Madeleine FinnThe Honourable Justice James Patrick O’Hara BarryThe Honourable Justice Nahum MushinThe Honourable Justice Christine Elizabeth DaweThe Honourable Justice Robert James Charles BenjaminAPPOINTMENTS AND RETIREMENTSAppointments31 July 2006 The Honourable Justice Judith Maureen Ryan14 December 2006 The Honourable Justice Jane Crisford, Family Court of WesternAustralia20 December 2006 The Honourable Justice Paul Cronin9 February 2007 The Honourable Justice Stephen Ernest Thackray appointedChief Judge Family Court of Western AustraliaRETIREMENTSJudges31 August 2006 The Honourable Justice Neil Buckley, Judge Administrator24 September 2006 The Honourable Justice Nicolas Tolcon, Family Court ofWestern Australia16 December 2006 The Honourable Justice Kemeri Ann Murray AO8 February 2007 The Honourable Justice Michael Henry Holden, Chief JudgeFamily Court of Western Australia9 March 2007 The Honourable Justice Mary Jane Murray LawrieJudicial Registrars3 July 2006 Mr Jonathan Warwick Ramsden31 July 2006 Mr David Peter Halligan30Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007Back to contents page

FAMILY COURT SERVICE LOCATIONSLegend :JC Judicial circuitJRC Judicial Registrar circuitRC Registrar circuitSRC Senior Registrar circuitFCC Family Consultant circuitATSI Aboriginal & Torres Strait Islander Family Liaison OfficersPart 2Adelaide RegistryBroken Hill JC/RC/FCCMt Gambier JC/RC/FCCAlbury Rural/Regional RegistrySRC/JC/RCAlice Springs Rural/Regional Registry*Brisbane RegistryCoffs Harbour JC/RC/FCCCanberra RegistryCairns Rural/Regional Registry* JCDandenong RegistryBairnsdale FCC (for Indigenouscommunity)Moe RCDarwin Registry*Dubbo Rural/Regional Registry JC/RCHobart Registry RC/FCCDevonport RC/FCCLaunceston Rural/Regional RegistryRC/FCCLismore Rural/Regional Registry JC/RCMelbourne RegistryBallarat RCBendigo RCGeelong RCHamilton RCMildura JC/RC/FCCWarnambool RCNewcastle RegistryPort Macquarie RCTaree RC/FCCTamworth JC/RC/FCCParramatta RegistryBathurst RCOrange JC/RCRockhampton Rural/Regional RegistryJC/RC/FCCSydney RegistryTownsville RegistryWollongong Rural/Regional RegistryJC/JRC/SRC/RCOverview of the court* ATSI Indigenous Family Liaison Officers (IFLOs) located in Darwin, Alice Springsand Cairns visit remote and isolated communities in Australia and the Torres Straitand Tiwi Islands as the need arises.Back to contents pageFamily Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–200731

Overview of the court Part 232Family Court of Australia Annual Report 2006–2007 Back to contents page