Essay On Australian Court Hierarchy

The Australian Court Hierarchy is structured through five different types of courts that suit different needs. The Hierarchy categorises the importance of cases by the level of offence or reason. This is then forwarded into the court it categorises under. The employees of the Australian judicial position have roles that vary to the courts they serve in.

The court with the most authority is the High Court of Australia that deals with the most serious and important cases. The supreme court then trials more serious indictable offences more than seven hundred and fifty-thousand dollars. The District court hears the most criminal trials for less serious indictable offences above one hundred and fifty-thousand dollars as well as appeals from the

Magistrates’ courts. Magistrates’ courts are the most used as they deal with smaller and more common civil matters less than one hundred and fifty-thousand dollars. Magistrates also conduct committal hearings to higher courts. There are then, the Federal Court which deals with breaches of Commonwealth legislation. The Family Court that hears divorce and child custody proceedings. The Federal Circuit Court is the only court that does not deal with criminal matters. The Federal Circuit Court only deals with the judicial review of bankruptcy cases/Family Law. They can provide up to seven hundred and fifty-thousand dollars of relief.

Courts higher up in the court hierarchy have authority over lower courts through The Doctrine of Precedent.

The Doctrine of Precedent means that the judgments of higher courts must be binded to the lower court. This doctrine highlights the importance and superiority of the higher courts. There are, however, many disadvantages to the Doctrine of Precedent. There has been criticism that the Doctrine of Precent constrains the law and causes it to be too slow to develop. This is a major problem as society is constantly changing and the rigid preconditions for appeals and new cases could possibly make a segment of society feel as though they are being denied important rights. It also makes judicial decisions more complex as it can be difficult to find relevant prior trials or

hearings.

The court hierarchy is structured so that if a defendant, plaintiff or prosecutor is displeased with the outcome of a trial, he she or it has the automatic right to appeal to a higher court or the court of Appeal. The Federal Court hears appeals from the Federal District Court. These appellate courts do develop experience with common appeals. This creates a direction to avoid confusion as to where the appeal will be considered. This is also a disadvantage to the court system as the appeals process can also be used gingerly or without principle, which can backlog higher courts with insignificant and repetitive reviews.

In every jurisdiction there are more inferior courts spread across a wider area. This locality allows for the courts to deal with by comparison, minor matters without defendant, plaintiff, witnesses and legal representatives travelling far. It is also common opinion that since minor crimes are often crimes against property or public order, they should be dealt within the community where they took place.

As the court’s position in the hierarchy determines the types of cases it will deal with, judges in these courts can deepen their knowledge and experience in dealing with these cases.

This results in quicker, more cost effective trials and hearings as there is not as much of a need for research and consideration. Hierarchies also support diversification and creation of specialist courts for dealing with children, aboriginal and Torres Strait islanders, family law, and drug offences. Many specialised services, due to the resources they require, may only reach a limited segment of the population, leaving victims in regional and remote towns without an improvement. Another Concern is that most specialist courts in Australia do not require judicial officers to receive any training as a prerequisite for appointment. Some specialist courts e.g. the Family Violence devision, have cases that can be extremely traumatising for jurists and can damage their ability to work unless they are given proper support and

recognition.

Intermediate and superior courts contain a jurisdiction that are experts in their field of law. The higher courts need greater judges to deal with cases that a more complex. Only the most experienced and sophisticated lawyers and judges are appointed to the bench of the Supreme Court.