Proposals to ease load on Supreme Court

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33577, 4 July 1974, Page 3

Proposals to ease load on Supreme Court

(Neu, Zealand Press Association)

WELLINGTON, July 3.

The appointment of more judges, creation of a Crown court, the switching of some Supreme Court business to lower courts, and the creation of a new lower tier of the Magistrate’s courts have been suggested today as ways of overcoming the pressure on the Supreme Court.

Changes in matrimonial procedures in court, simplified jurisdiction of “minor” charges, a small-claims court, and the abolition of the depositions system have also been suggested.

The proposals come in an 85-page report of the Special Committee on Court Business, set up in July last year by the Minister of Justice (Dr Finlay) after statements by judges that the Supreme Court was becoming overloaded.

“Time needed”

The report was released today by Dr Finlay’s office, together with a statement from the Minister (now overseas) that the report would need much study and comment and that he would take no action on it until a reasonable time for study had been allowed. The committee’s chairman was Mr Justice Speight, and the other members were Mr D. Sullivan, S.M., the Solic-itor-General (Mr R. C. Savage), the former Secretary for Justice (Mr E. A. Missen), an Auckland barrister, Mr J. Henry, and a former Secretary for Defence and Maori Affairs (Mr J. K. Hunn). Some of the committee’s proposals come as suggestions rather than firm recommendations and most will require more study before they can be implemented. Mr Savage and Mr Sullivan have also filed dissenting views on some matters. Lower ceiling The committee recommends that the maximum penalty for many “minor” matters be reduced to three months imprisonment, so that the cases need not be dealt with in the Supreme Court. Included in these matters would be all offences of dishonesty — such as theft, receiving, fraud, forgery — where the value involved is small, say less than $2OO, Other such offences would include unlawful interference with a motor vehicle, car conversion, indecent exposure, indecent act or performances for gain, unlawful sexual intercourse with a female under 16 (where the offender is under 21), and wilful damage. As well, for the sake of consistency, the list could include a wide range of minor matters for which the maximum penalty was never imposed. Legal aid effect

The report says that since the extension of legal aid and the appointment of duty solicitors, the number of

comparatively minor offences coming before the Supreme Court for trial by jury is likely to increase unless some step, such as that recommended, fc taken. A Magistrate would still have the right to deline jurisdiction and to send the case to the higher court. The report says another important matter to engage the committee was the possible need to vary the jury trial system. It says the committee has yet to reach a firm concensus, but it says that it may be necessary in the future either to increase the number of Supreme Court judges, or else to convert part of the court into a Crown court, using present judges supplemented by additional specialised judges. Matrimonial The report recommends that the present jurisdiction of the Supreme Court under the Matrimonial Proceedings Act and the Matrimonial Property Act should be extended to the Magistrate’s Court. If this were done, there should be some special warrant for selected magistrates to do this work. The committee recommends that civil jurisdiction in the Magistrate’s Court should be increased from $3OOO (where it has been since January, 1972) to $5OOO — some members of the committee favoured $lO,OOO. There should also be more study on ways of setting up an alternative court at a

lower tier of the magistrate’s jurisdiction to be presided over by the Registrars, Justices of the Peace, and other ad hoc Commissioners. They would try many traffic cases, and could handle many other lesser matters. Alternatives There could also be a “small-claims court,” though the members of the committee tend to favour a “court of petty sessions.” These alternative courts would be run by people with legal training, who would be specially trained for the task, as at present with some Justices of the Peace. The other main recommendation of the committee is full support for an earlier proposal by the Criminal Law Reform Committee to abolish the depositions system. Some dissent Mr Savage dissented on three matters, saying that while liability to more than three months imprisonment had long been the yardstick for determining the right to elect a trial by jury, it was an illogical one.

Three or six months made little difference — it was the liability to prison at all that was crucial.

He supported the proposal to reduce maximum penalties but would go further and draw a distinction between first offenders and others.

Mr Savage also did not accept proposals in relation

to the Matrimonial Proceedings Act, especially .as affecting divorce. This matter was of great importance to the parties and the community, and should stay with the Supreme Court, he said.

He also opposed, actively, any extension of the role of non-legal judicial officers. All courts should be presided over by a lawyer, at least, he said.

“Too busy”

The report encloses many statistics on Supreme Court work, and says it is the strong view of judges that the percentage of their time actually spent in court, 84 per cent in 1973, is far too high. Little time is left for research, consideration of difficult matters, and writing of judgments.

The idea of a “Crown court” follows practice in England, where this is the superior court for the trial of criminal cases, and is the only court dealing with criminal jury trials. In New Zealand, a Crown court would also deal with major criminal cases. It was envisaged that initially two Crown court judges, one in Auckland and one in Wellington, would be appointed to assist Supreme Court judges in Crown court matters.

On matrimonial law, the committee says consideration could be given to setting up a family court where all matrimonial and family matters would be considered.