{ "docId": "019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-61b88342a372", "docSlug": "03095094c078fb47", "documentTitle": "Review of efficiency of the operation of the federal courts", "authorId": "misc", "authorName": "PwC", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.333, "pageNumber": 48, "pageCount": 105, "prevPage": 47, "nextPage": 49, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "density": "overcrowded", "nDataPoints": 8, "notes": "The slide contains a large blacked-out area, likely obscuring a chart or table that was originally present.", "elementsJson": [ "headline_text", "paragraph", "footnote" ], "metadataConfidence": 0.9, "imagePath": null, "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-61b88342a372/48", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-61b88342a372", "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-61b88342a372.json", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5de0-76bd-a165-61b88342a372#slide-48", "components": [ { "bbox": null, "kind": "callout", "text": "FCC judges sit more frequently and are less likely to reserve judgment.", "attrs": null, "subkind": null, "toolName": "Visual emphasis", "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis", "confidence": null, "componentId": "019dd952-41aa-7578-83b8-6413a7caed80", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.08, "w": 0.3, "x": 0.64, "y": 0.02 }, "kind": "image", "text": null, "attrs": null, "subkind": "icon-grid", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "861faad3-4c28-44b9-a72b-7ae8a6ae0977", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": null, "kind": "metric", "text": "sitting days: 150", "attrs": null, "subkind": "primary", "toolName": "Quantification", "toolSlug": "quantification", "confidence": null, "componentId": "019dd952-41aa-7578-83b8-6ba9b12f83d7", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.55, "w": 0.55, "x": 0.04, "y": 0.24 }, "kind": "paragraph", "text": "In 2016-17, FCC judges sat for 150 days on average, while FCoA judges sat for 129 days. The average number of matters managed by FCC judges each day, excluding trials, was 7.9 in 2016-17. This compares to the FCoA in which judges only hear trials as all pre-trial matters are managed by registrars and others in preparation for trial. In effect, FCC judges are sitting more frequently in court, and when they are, they are completing more tasks. The practices of judges is also evident in the way in which matters are finalised. On average, FCC judges have an ex-tempore to reserved judgment ratio of 80%. Ex-tempore judgments made up 40% of the total judgements delivered by FCoA judges. The average (absolute) number of reserved judgments is greater among FCoA judges than FCC judges. Reservation of judgments can mean that parties are without resolution for some time following a trial. It may also mean that FCoA judges proportionally spend more time on case management to consider and write judgments. The complexity of cases can also influence the time needed for case management. Court processes also contribute to judicial practice. On average, FCC judges manage a docket of around 350 matters at a given time, with a pending to finalisation ratio of 1.7. The existence of a 'known backlog' that is assigned to a FCC judge was considered by some as a direct incentive for each judge to clear cases as quickly as possible. In the FCoA, cases are not allocated to judges upfront. This results in FCoA judges handling an anecdotal 30-40 matters. No new cases are listed with the judge until agreed with the registrar with responsibility to allocate cases. As a result, FCoA judges have no sense of the 'looming' backlog until it is listed with them and may not incentivise speedy finalisation of judgment or of trial length.", "attrs": null, "subkind": "paragraph", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "c0054bd6-a932-4f79-81af-3f5bfed3c2ea", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.15, "w": 0.55, "x": 0.04, "y": 0.82 }, "kind": "source-note", "text": "Source: Data provided upon request (FCoA and FCC). Note: Although finalisations per judge are 338 and 114 for the FCC and FCoA respectively, because some cases are not assigned to a judge (such as when matters are settled when under the direction of a registrar in the FCoA), the above average figures of allocated finalisations per judicial FTE will not match those expected 338/114 numbers. Note: FCoA data relates only to General Division judges and does not include Appeal Division data. Note: \"Approximate total possible sitting days\" based upon data provided by Federal Court and is total year minus weekends, public holidays and indicative leave entitlements.", "attrs": null, "subkind": null, "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "223dd2cf-7e60-48c4-ab9c-bdb604e33268", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.06, "w": 0.55, "x": 0.04, "y": 0.16 }, "kind": "title", "text": "FCC judges sit more frequently and are less likely to reserve judgment", "attrs": null, "subkind": "action-title", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "793facd7-7cd0-4a03-8ceb-b07930b7cf32", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.05, "w": 0.6, "x": 0.04, "y": 0.1 }, "kind": "title", "text": "The differences in judicial practice", "attrs": null, "subkind": "headline", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "1ccda8b7-2dfc-4d6c-822d-54dd1c568562", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null } ], "metrics": [], "tools": [], "frameworks": [], "arcBeats": [], "loops": [], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }