Court Hierarchy: KK5

jurisdiction

the power of a court to hear and decide a case

• original - the power of a court to hear a case for the first time

• appellate - the power of a court to hear a case in which a decision is being reviewed or challenged (i.e., being appealed to a higher court)

jurisdiction of magistrates court - civil

original - claims up to $100,000

appellate - none

jurisdiction of county court - civil

original - unlimited in all civil claims

appellate - no appeals, unless given power under a specific Act of Parliament

jurisdiction of supreme court (trial division) - civil

original - unlimited in all civil claims

appellate - on a question of law from the Magistrates Court (unless the Chief Magistrate made the order) and from VCAT (unless the President or vice-president made the order)

jurisdiction of supreme court (court of appeal) - civil

original - none

appealatte

• all appeals from a single judge of the County or Supreme Court

• on a question of law from the Magistrates Court when the Chief Magistrate made the order

• on a question of law from VCAT when the president or a vice-president made the order

victorian court hierarchy

court hierarchy is the ranking of courts based on the severity and complexity of cases they hear

• high court

• supreme court (appeal)

• supreme court (trial)

• county court

• magistrates’ court

reasons for court hierarchy

• appeals

• administrative convenience

appeals

• an application to have a higher court in the hierarchy review a ruling of a lower court

• if there are grounds for appeal, a party who is dissatisfied with the outcome of a case, can take the matter to a higher court to challenge the decision

parties in appeals

appellant - the party initiating an appeal

respondent - the party against whom an appeal is made

grounds for an appeal

refers to the reasons or legal basis on which a person can challenge a decision made in a case

there are three grounds for an appeal:

• appealing because of the remedy awarded

  • eg. the defendant may appeal on the grounds that the amount of damages they have been ordered to pay the plaintiff is excessive (rebel wilson case)

• appealing a question of fact

  • eg. lower court made a mistake on how it interpreted or assessed the evidence presented and facts of the case

• appealing on a question of law

  • eg. incorrect law was applied

relationship between appeals and the court hierarchy

without a ranking of courts, there would be no process to appeal a case to a higher court, which would create unfairness if a court incorrectly decided a civil dispute. this provides an opportunity for unjust decisions to be amended.

2nd reason: administrative convenience

the court hierarchy allows cases to be distributed based on their seriousness and complexity

• minor civil claims - allocated to the lower courts where they can be heard relatively quickly

• more complex civil matters - generally take longer to hear. these cases are heard in higher courts by judges with expertise to deal with such matters

administrative convenience - magistrates court

• deals with less serious and complex civil disputes (e.g. cases where a plaintiff is seeking $100,000 or less)

• cases are heard more quickly and at a lower cost

  • does not require may complicated forms or physically facilities (such as a jury box), unlike higher courts like the supreme court

  • filing and hearing fees are significantly lowers, reflecting the less complex nature of cases

  • there are more magistrates and magistrates courts locations, due to the high volume of minor civil disputes, like ensures greater access through promoting a more efficient resolution of civil cases

  • reduces delays as streamlined process and better allocation of resources

administrative convenience - county and supreme court

• handle more serious and complex civil disputes, with both courts having unlimited jurisdiction

• there cases take longer to hear civil matters due to their complexity, and these courts can devote great time and resources to resolve the matter

• the hierarchical structure allows the county and supreme court to easily manage the allocation of time for longer and more complicated cases

• judges have expertise to deal with such matters

administrative convenience - class actions

• can only be heard in the supreme court

• class actions require judges with expertise in managing these types of cases and demand significant resources to be properly heard and resolved

strengths of court hierarchy

• a court hierarchy allows courts to adopt different processes and use their resources in a way that ensure cases can be resolved efficiently. For example, given the volume of smaller cases heard in the magistrates court, there are more magistrates and more court venues

• a court hirecray allows appeals to be made by both parties if there is an error in the original decision

weaknesses of court hierarchy

• the different courts may be confusing for people who do not understand the civil justice system. this can be particularly so where there are overlapping jurisdictions or for self-represented parties

• no automatic right to appeal, and the appeal processes are difficult to understand without a lawyer, particularly as there is generally the need to establish grounds for appeal

court hierarchy - fairness

achieves

• having appeals allows you to pursue the case further if you feel you are treated without impartiality

• admin convenience ensures outcomes are fair - experience with these matters

court hierarchy - equality

achieves

• if you feel like things have not been equal, you can pursue this further

doesn’t achieve

• not everyone has access to experienced judges

court hierarchy - access

achieves

• administrative convenience ensures greater timeliness

doesn’t achieve

• appeals can add extra steps to a case, making it more financially difficult to pursue or stressful