Essay on Australian Civil Procedure

The Australian Civil Procedure is directly influenced by the British Civil Procedure due to the colonial legacy. Nonetheless, the civil procedure in Australia has been adapted to mirror the circumstances of each federation. It should be remembered that each Australian colony operated based on a two- or three-tiered judicial system headed by a supreme court before federation. However, most states currently possess codified Uniform Civil Procedure Rules. The 19^th-century doctor amazed by the innovative world of personalized medicine, telehealth, cancer immunotherapy, 3D Printing, and robotic surgery can credit the proactive rules and regulations that govern Australian healthcare. On the other hand, the lack of progress characterized by ornate courtrooms and tedious, long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noted by the lawyer can be attributed to the bureaucracy in civil law enaction and amendment in Australia.

Health Law in Australia

The ambiguity and transformation in healthcare seen by the 19^th-century doctor can be attributed to legislation like the Public Health Act (2011). [1]The Act offers a modernized, flexible and ambiguous framework for responding to new public health challenges in Australia. The framework offered by the Public Health Act allows for the modernization of healthcare systems across Australia to allow the adoption of state-of-the-art practices, procedures, tools, and technologies in healthcare. In tandem with legislation like the Mental Health Act of 2009 and the Health Care Act of 2008, health law in Australia offers exhaustive solutions while allowing room for adaptability.[2][3] As such, it is not surprising that the doctor would find such an innovative world of personalized medicine, telehealth, cancer immunotherapy, 3D Printing, and robotic surgery in Australian hospitals even those in South Wales.

The Australian Civil Procedure

On the other hand, the insistence of conservative judges seated in ornate courtrooms and tedious long-drawn procedures and paperwork seen by the lawyer can be attributed to the bureaucracy of civil law enaction and amendment in Australia. For instance, in New South Wales, civil procedure legislation is grounded by the Civil procedures Act of 2005 (NSW), the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 (NSW), the Supreme Court Rules of 1970 (NSW), the District Court Rules of 2009 (NSW), and the Local Court Rules of 2009 (NSW). A close examination of each of these laws reveals that not many changes have been made to tailor the legislation to the contemporary legal environment.

The Civil Procedures Act of 2005 (NSW)

The insistence of the judges’ conservatism and long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noticed by the lawyer can be attributed to some of the contents of the Civil Procedures Act of 2005 (NSW).[4] For instance, Section 2 of the Act lays out judgments and orders which are unenforceable until entered. The Act mandates that a judgment or court order cannot be enforced until it has been entered as laid out in the uniform rules. Moreover, the Act mandates that the criterion extends to any order, judgment, decree, or determination of the court. The Act also mandates that the provisions affect any adjudication or award of an individual with authority to make the said adjudication or award as it is filed and registered in the court. It is therefore explainable why change would be slow as noticed by the lawyer.

Commencement and updating. The law was enacted in 2005 and is an update on Section 53 and 56 of the cf Act No 9 (1973). The law is also an update on Section 22 of Act No 11 of 1970.[5] However, since the law was enacted, there have been no notable updates. Moreover, the law and its predecessors did not address any of the concerns that alarm the lawyer from the previous century. In other words, the bureaucratic and dragged-out process of implementing and updating the law has ensured that a plethora of provisions have remained the same with only mundane adjustments made. Therefore, the lawyer’s disappointment in the Australian Civil procedure compared to the doctor’s surprise is justified.

The Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 (NSW),

Likewise, the lack of change in judges’ conservatism and long-drawn procedures and paperwork as seen by the lawyer can be attributed to some provisions in the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 (NSW). For instance, Section 1.2 cf SCR Part 12, rule 2 states that the Supreme Court in any division may make an order for the proceedings to be moved to the Court of Appeal in relation to the proceedings that were started at the division level.[6] On the one hand, this ensures that justice delayed is not justice denied. However, on the other hand, it contributes to the system of conservatism and dragged-out procedures paperwork which are the source of the lawyer’s disappointment.

Commencement and updating.  The bill was signed into law in 2005 under the Civil Procedure Act.[7] The Oaths Act (1900) serves as the basis for the fees and other amounts applicable.[8] Contrastingly, the Judiciary Act (1903) provides the framework for notices of a constitutional manner.[9] As of August 2021, there have been no alterations or amendments to the bill. Likewise, the bill espouses provisions from the Oaths Act of 1990 and the Judiciary Act of 1903.[10] Such a revelation explains the insistence of conservative judges sitting in the ornate courtrooms and tedious, long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noticed by the lawyer.

The Supreme Court Rules of 1970 (NSW)

As with the prior mentioned laws, the lack of change in judges’ conservatism and long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noted by the lawyer can be attributed to certain provisions in the Supreme Court Rules of 1970 (NSW). Notably, Section 13.1 (Interpretation) mandates that a media manager is required to manage the court’s media.[11] The media manager’s duties also extend to both civil and criminal court proceedings as laid out in the legislation. As much as the designation of a media manager allows the court to ascertain words and expressions, it is a position of redundancy. Therefore, such designation and delegates contribute to the judge conservatism, ornate and tedious courtrooms, and long-drawn procedures as noticed by the lawyer.

Commencement and updating. The relevant bill was signed into law in 1970 under the Supreme Court Act. As of August 2021, there has been no update to the Act of the rules. In other words, the same guidelines laid out in the Act ground the practices and procedures.[12] Such a fact justifies the lawyer’s disappointment compared to the pleasant surprise received by the 19^th-century doctor.

The District Court Rules of 2009 (NSW)

Likewise, the lack of change in judges’ conservatism, tedious courtrooms, and long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noticed by the lawyer is because of certain clauses in the District Court Rules of 2009 (NSW). Particularly, Section 2.1 (Sittings of the Court) mandates that the registrar for a proclaimed place shall affix a notice of the day and hour of the court one month before the day chosen for the court procession.[13] However, in the information age, integrative systems are in place to automate such communications. Therefore, the hesitation to adopt integrated communication systems justifies the lawyer’s disappointment.

Commencement and updating. The bill was signed into law in 2009 under the District Court Rules Act of 1973. The rules were updated in 2009 to bring forth the District Court Rules.[14] However, as of August 2021, there have been no further amendments and updates to the rules.[15] Such a state of affairs justifies the lawyer’s concern. It means that bureaucracy among other shortcomings is still rife in Australian Civil Procedures.

The Local Court Rules (2009) NSW

Finally, the lack of change in judges’ conservatism, tedious courtrooms, and long-drawn procedures and paperwork as noticed by the lawyer can also be attributed to particular contents in the Local Court Rules of 2009 (NSW). Particularly, Section 8.10 (Court of Records) mandates that any party to the proceedings has a right to access a copy of the court record or even a transcript of evidence taken at the proceedings.[16] For the most part, such a clause ensures that transparency during court proceedings is ensured. However, it also endangers the credibility of the said evidence because of the ambiguity in who can be characterized as a party to the proceedings. Therefore, as noticed by the lawyer, the action is rooted in bureaucracy, tedious, long-drawn procedures, and paperwork.

Commencement and updating. The bill was signed into law in 2009 under the Local Court Act of 2007. As of August 2021, there have not been any changes to the law.[17] Therefore, the lawyer’s concern is justified because the same bureaucracy is evident from 2007 to 2009 and ultimately 2021.

Conclusion

The proactive rules and legislations that govern Australian healthcare can be credited for the innovative world of personalized medicine, telehealth, cancer immunotherapy, 3D Printing, and robotic surgery as seen by the doctor. On the other hand, the ornate courtrooms and tedious, long-drawn procedures and paperwork noticed by the lawyer can be attributed to the bureaucracy of civil law enaction and amendment in Australia. Notably, there have been measured or no amendments to the Civil procedures Act of 2005 (NSW), the Uniform Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 (NSW), the Supreme Court Rules of 1970 (NSW), the District Court Rules of 2009 (NSW), and the Local Court Rules of 2009 (NSW) since their enaction.

Bibliography

Legislation

Public Health Act (2011)

Mental Health Act (2009)

Health Care Act (2008)

Civil Procedures Act (2005) (NSW)

Uniform Civil Procedure Rules (2005) (NSW)

The Oaths Act (1900)

Judiciary Act (1903)

Supreme Court Rules (1970) (NSW)

Supreme Court Act (1970)

District Court Rules (2009) (NSW)

District Court Rules Act (1973)

Local Court Rules (2009) (NSW).

Local Court Act (2007)

Websites

New South Wales Consolidated Acts, “Civil Procedure Act 2005 – as at 23 September 2020 – Act 28 of 2005” (Austlii.edu.au2020) <https://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/cpa2005167/> accessed August 30, 2021

New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “District Court Rules 1973” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/dcr1973236/> accessed August 30, 2021

New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Local Court Rules 2009” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/lcr2009180/> accessed August 30, 2021

New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Supreme Court Rules 1970” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/scr1970232/> accessed August 30, 2021

New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <http://www6.austlii.edu.au/cgi-bin/viewdb/au/legis/nsw/consol_reg/ucpr2005305/> accessed August 30, 2021

[1] Public Health Act (2011).

[2] Mental Health Act (200).

[3] Health Care Act (2008).

[4] Civil Procedures Act of 2005 (NSW) (S. 2).

[5] New South Wales Consolidated Acts, “Civil Procedure Act 2005 – as at 23 September 2020 – Act 28 of 2005” (Austlii.edu.au2020) <> accessed August 30, 2021.

[6] Civil Procedure Rules of 2005 (NSW) (S. 1.2).

[7] New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <> accessed August 30, 2021.

[8] The Oaths Act (1900).

[9] the Judiciary Act (1903).

[10] New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Uniform Civil Procedure Rules 2005” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <> accessed August 30, 2021.

[11] Supreme Court Rules of 1970 (NSW) (S. 13.1).

[12] New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Supreme Court Rules 1970” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <> accessed August 30, 2021.

[13] the District Court Rules of 2009 (NSW) (S 2.1).

[14] New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “District Court Rules 1973” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <> accessed August 30, 2021.

[15] Ibid

[16] Local Court Rules of 2009 (NSW) (S 8. 10).

[17] New South Wales Consolidated Regulations, “Local Court Rules 2009” (Austlii.edu.au2015) <> accessed August 30, 2021.