Unit 3.2 - Civil Justice System Flashcards
burden of proof
plaintiff - burden of proof
there are 2 parties in a civil dispute, the plaintiff and the defendant. the party who is responsible for initiating the civil claim possess the burden of proof.
- rests on the party who initiates the claim
- defendant does not necessarily need to defend themselves
- protects the presumption of innocence
standard of proof
balance of probabilities
the level to which the plaintiff has to prove their case
- lower than criminal proceedings - just which is more likely
- quality and quantity
limitations of actions
how long since the incident occurred? are you within the time limit?
–> ensures that system is not clogged up
a civil dispute cannot be initiated if the time limit has elapsed
negligence (personal injuries etc) - 3 years
defamation - 1 year
may be longer in some circumstances
- class action, workplace or sexual assault has no limitation on actions
costs
how much will it cost you? can you afford it?
high costs are a reality of our system
filing fees, expert witnesses, legal fees, hearing/court fees
however
- adverse costs: legal fees may be covered by other party if you win
enforcement issues
can / will they pay? what if you win and they can’t pay?
–> is it worth initiating a claim if defendant can’t pay
judgments can be enforced through a garnishee order (payment plan) or an examination notice (defendant’s assets seized and sold)
principles of justice - fairness (process)
all people can participate in the justice system and it’s processes should be impartial and unbiased and open.
factors that could affect the ability of people to participate in an impartial manner include:
- personal characteristics
- cultural differences
- financial status
examples
- procedural fairness
- understanding court processes
- the opportunity to:
- know the case against them
- present their case
- rebut the other parties case
- appeal a decision
principles of justice - equality (people)
all people engaging with the justice system and it’s processes should be treated in the same way; if the treatment creates disparity or disadvantage, adequate measures should be implemented to allow all to engage with the justice system without disparity or disadvantages from discrimination.
- don’t use impartial or unbiased in answer!!!
the same processes and procedures are used in similar disputes. within a civil dispute, both parties should be on the same footing, when needed adjustments can be made.
- processes being free from bias
- decision makers should be independant
- upholding the rule of law through equal applications of the law and equality in the process
- factors effect the disadvantage groups
principles of justice - access (to institution)
all people should be able to engage with the justice system and its processes on an informed basis
the removal of barriers that limit the ability of people to participate and engage in the legal system
barriers can include:
- money/costs
- delays
- lack of understanding
and can lead to unjust outcomes for the plaintiff/defendant
examples
- access to a range of mechanisms that can be used to resolve civil disputes (VCAT, CAV and courts)
- access is hindered by
- costs and delays
- complex legal procedures
mediation
a method of dispute resolution that uses an independant party to assist the parties reach a resolution. they do not give advice or make suggestions to either party, they are just there to maintain peace. the agreements is only binding if parties sign a settlement
- the aim of mediation is to resolve disputes in a cooperative manner
- discussion rather than evidence - allows parties to discuss feelings and values
mediation - strengths
- parties make decisions, therefore are more likely to follow through and obey the final outcome decided
- independent 3rd party to facilitate discussion
- more informal than court - more comfortable for parties
- private and confidential
mediation - weaknesses
- final decision is not binding
- imbalance of power
- mediator cannot give advice or suggestions
- can be costly, people cannot afford mediation
mediation - appropriateness
- both parties are willing to abide by the outcome
- willing to compromise
- doesn’t have a history of broken promises or violence
- has an ongoing and future relationship
conciliation
a method of dispute resolution method that uses an independent party to assist the parties reach a resolution, including giving advice and making suggestions
- unlike a mediator, the conciliator will offer advice to parties and suggest possible resolutions based on the discussion
conciliation - strengths
- parties make decisions, therefore are more likely to follow through and obey the final outcome decided
- independent 3rd party to facilitate discussion
- more informal than court - more comfortable for parties
- private and confidential
conciliation - weaknesses
- final decision is not binding
- imbalance of power
- can be costly, people cannot afford conciliation
conciliation - appropriateness
- both parties are willing to abide by the outcome
- willing to compromise
- doesn’t have a history of broken promises or violence
- has an ongoing and future relationship
arbitration
a method of dispute resolution method in which an independent party is appointedto listen to both parties and make a legally binding solution
- listens to both sides and examines the evidence
- the decision is known as an arbitration award
- similar to a trial
- absence of formal rules of evidence and procedure
- arbitrator chooses how disputes will be handled
arbitration - strengths
- independent 3rd party
- legal binding decision
- appeal process
- cheaper - no lawyers
- time saved from not going to court
arbitration - weaknesses
- parties may not be satisfied with the decision
- cost more than the other dispute resolution methods
arbitration - appropriateness
- when a decision needs to be legally enforceable
- when 2 parties cannot come to an agreement using other forms of dispute resolution methods
- when there is a history of broken promises
- usually used for disputes between businesses
- not accessible for everyone - usually part of terms of a contract
jurisdiction in courts - original
original
MC = claims up to $100000
CC = unlimited
SC (Trial) = unlimited
SC (appeal) = none
jurisdiction in courts - appellate
appellate
MC = none
CC = none
SC (trial) = from MC + VCAT - on questions of law
SC (appeal) = from CC and SC(t) - on questions of law or about amount of damages.
from VCAT - on questions of law
administrative convenience
enables the efficient use of resources - allows for the distribution of cases according to their seriousness and complexity
- it is more efficient use of resources to have a court hierarchy where different types of cases are heard in different courts
- eg. as the majority of cases are of a minor nature, it is more efficient to have these cases heard in the MC or VCAT and other tribunals
- this avoids the clogging up of the system and enable the higher courts, such as the supreme court of trial to concentrate on rarer and more complex cases
- ‘efficiently’
appeals
- allows for cases to be reviewed by higher courts which may reverse the lower courts decision
- a party who is dissatisfied with a decision and has grounds for appeal in civil cases can take the matter to a higher court to challenge the decision
a system of appeals ensures a fair hearing by allowing for the correction of errors made by lower courts
3 grounds for appeals - questions of law
- questions of fact - liable or not liable
- amounts of damages (remedy awarded)
if there were no higher and lower courts (hierarchy), then there would be no higher courts to appeal to
judge/magistrate - role
- impartial 3rd party
- enforces rules of evidence and procedure equally
- decides questions of law
- directs jury and answers questions (judge only)
- possesses significant case management powers
- decides a verdict and remedy if there is no jury present
- case management
- order mediation
- give directions
- ensures everyone complies with processes and procedures, ruling on the admissibility of evidence.
judge/magistrate - strenghts
fairness
- ensures procedural fairness
- enforcing the rules of evidence and procedure
- competent (expertise)
- open court
equality
- equal treatment
- independent and impartial judge/magistrate
access
- to the judge’s expertise in ensuring natural justice
- engagement and informed by the judge
- pre-trial - access to the case details
judge/magistrates - weaknesses
fairness, equality and access
- the judge’s expertise is fully utilised:
- witness
- evidence
- questioning
- unable to assist a self-represented accused
- when there is a jury, the judge doesn’t determine the verdict at trials or the amount of damages (except in defamation cases)
jury - role
deliver a verdict - liable or not liable
- make a decision - decide questions of facts
- be objective - unbiased, base their decision only on the evidence
- 6 randomly selected members of the community
- parties that wants a jury must foot the bill
- it is the responsibility of the jury to:
- listen to and remember the evidence
- understand directions and summing up
- not conduct their own investigations or research
- select a foreperson
jury - strengths
fairness
- ensures procedural fairness
- trial by peers - cross section of the community
- independent - randomly selected
equality
- equal treatment - all plaintiffs and defendants are entitled to choose to have a jury - regardless of personal characteristics
- independant and impartial (unbiased)
- decision is based on the evidence - juries cannot conduct their own investigations
access
- trial is conducted in plain english, non legal jargon, so juries can understand the trial
- assist the accused understand the trial
jury - weaknesses
fairness, equality
- not necessarily a cross section of community - disqualified, excused or ineligible
- jury does not have to give reason and deliberation happens behind closed doors - not being an open process hinders fairness
access
- deliberations are secret - no access to jury’s reason
- many people in the community cannot be in the jury for various reasons and denied access (disability, police, lawyers)
parties - role
- presents the parties case (pre-trial, units, discovery of documents, witnesses, evidence, facts and legal arguments
- present evidence and arguments to the decision maker
- the plaintiff is attempting to prove that the defendant caused harm to them, on the balance of probabilities
- the defendant will test the evidence of the plaintiff and may present their own evidence to dispute the arguments of the plaintiff
- examine witnesses, opening and closing address, assist the judge in jury matters
- making submissions regarding sentencing
parties - responsbility
- minimise delays, disclose the existence of critical documents at the earliest time possible
- do not mislead or deceive anyone
- one reasonable endeavours to resolve the disputes
parties - strengths
fairness
- party control
- ‘the truth should emerge’
- both parties has the opportunity to:
- know the case against them
- present their case/defence
- rebut the other parties case
equality
- equal treatment and equal opportunity to present their case
access
- courts provide some guidance to a self-represented litigant
- cheaper via court access to mediation to both parties
parties - weaknesses
fairness, equality
- party control
- self rep party receive minimal assistance from the court
- delays can occur (deterioration of evidence)
- mediations are private and not open which hinders an open process
access
- self rep party will have difficulty understanding their rights
- limited access to legal aid in civil cases (CLC is the best place for this)
the need for legal practitioners
- some overarching obligations as their client
- further obligations include:
- cooperation with the other party and the court in resolving the dispute in a cost effective and timely way
- must not mislead the court about evidence or the applicable law - present the parties case: witnesses, evidence, facts and legal arguments
- examination of witnesses
- make submissions regarding sentencing
- opening and closing address
legal practitioners - what
- trained lawyers represent each party in a trial and manage each parties case
- barristers present the case within the trial, solicitors provide administrative support and manage the case overall
legal practitioners - role
- use their legal expertise to support their case and advice their client on the best steps to resolve their matter
- preparing the required paperwork to initiate disputes at the appropriate institution (it others attempts at negotiations have failed)
- manage and engage in pre-trial processes