One Administrative Court Proposed

Press, Volume CVII, Issue 31380, 27 May 1967, Page 14

One Administrative Court Proposed

(New Zealand Preet Association)

WELLINGTON, May 26. Consolidation of the various existing authorities into one administrative court to hear appeals on decisions made by administrative tribunals was suggested by a Crown counsel, Mr G. S. Orr, today in an address to the conference of the Australia and New Zealand Association of Law Students.

If, as was the case in New Zealand, parties to civil litigation in the Magistrate’s Court had a right of appeal on merits to the Supreme Court, was it unreasonable, Mr Orr asked, to suggest that parties affected by decisions of administrative tribunals should have a comparable right ,

“By comparable right I mean a right of appeal 'on the merits to a court. of- astanding comparable with that of the Supreme Court It appears likely that collectively the decisions of administrative tribunals exceed in value the aggregate value of money and property in dispute in the Supreme Court in any one year. Justice suggests that appeal rights should be at least equal” Mr Orr considered the simplest and most workable solution to the problem was to consolidate the various appeal authorities, together with the Land Valuation Court, the Court of Arbiration, and, if its functions were to continue, the Com-

. pensation Court in one administrative court, “It would no doubt be found convenient to establish a number of divisions in such a court to facilitate the orderly processing of business and to afford scope for specialisation by judges who could be appointed to sit in on one or more divisions as the need arose,” said Mr Orr.

The advantages of an administrative court wduld be: It would vest in one body of high standing the multiplicity of appeal authorities and special courts. Such a court could maintain the necessary degree of informality and ease of access which is essential in this jurisdiction.

It would enable a relatively small number of judges to be fully engaged on work requiring specialised knowledge of a kind not suitable to adjudication in the Supreme Court.

There would be no difficulty in having laymen with specialised knowledge sitting in various divisions with the judge. It was difficult to envisage laymen sitting in the Supreme Court. It would ensure that the Supreme Court remained free of involvement in matters having political and economic overtones which could, on occasions, reflect on its impartiality and complete independence of other organs of Government. It could, where appropriate, be vested with original jurisdiction, although few such cases would arise. A single permanent court of high standing would afford appellants a forum of the stature appropriate to the importance of the matters before it It would assist in attracting to this challenging judicial work lawyers who at present would almost certainly decline appointment to a special court or appeal authority of lesser status. Mr Orr said an administrative court would be a rationalisation of the present fragmented and uneven provisions for appeals from tribunals and an improvement in their status.