Search
This area does not yet contain any content.
Justinian News

Delay update ... "Extraordinary and excessive" delay - by the litigants ... Contest on costs ... Getting to grips with Qld industrial law takes time ... What is a "worker"? ... What is an "injury"? ... Justice Jenni frigging around ... Slow grind for earnest Circuiteer ... From judges' associate Ginger Snatch ... Read more >>

 

Politics Media Law Society


A biopsy on bias ... Darryl Rangiah and Oscar Wilde … A unity ticket … White flags at Ultimo … The Hyphen … BBC also on the ropes … Cease – FIRE … Why is Murdoch’s bias always wrong about everything? ... Read on >> 

This area does not yet contain any content.
Free Newsletter
Justinian Columnists

From the cutting room floor...Handsy Heydon goes to Perth ... Celebrity tour ... Conferenceville ... Dicey's job application speech from 2002 ... Other High Court judges mocked as "vegetables" ... Mason CJ ridiculed ... Speech bowdlerised for public consumption ... Courage of conviction MIA ... From our National Affairs Correspondent ... Read more >> 

Blow the whistle

 

News snips ...


The Segal Report on combatting antisemitism ... Sweeping recommendations ... In full >> 

Justinian's Bloggers

London Calling ... Sizzling in the Old Dart ... Story of the complaining law graduate ... Tattle Life brought to book ... Beckham family feud over royal gong ... Floyd Alexander-Hunt's postcard ... Read more >> 

"If there’s one family that hasn’t profited off politics, it's the Trump family."

Eric Trump, reported in the Financial Times, June 27, 2025 ... Read more flatulence ... 


Justinian Featurettes

Zeitgeist litigation ... Matt Collins KC on live-streaming of high-profile trials ... Social media nightmare ... Abuse of barristers ... Chilling emails ... Trials as a form of public entertainment ... Courts sleepwalking into a dangerous zone ... Framework needed to balance competing interests ... Paper delivered to Australian Lawyers Alliance Conference ... Read more >> 


Justinian's archive

The Circumlocution Office ... "Reform" of legal fees - four centuries of chicanery ... Tulkinghorn awards prizes for "reforms" that increase legal costs ... Jacking-up revenue by replacing "necessary or proper" costs with "fair and reasonable" costs ... From Justinian's Archive, January 17, 2012 ... Read more >> 


 

 

« Dot and the dinosaurs | Main | Sydney law factory ramps-up production »
Tuesday
May012018

Ahoy. Navigation assistance

Where are we with the ALRC inquiry into family law? ... Issues paper ... Access to justice ... Advocacy and support services ... Therapeutic justice ... Exploration of new modes of service delivery ... Peach Melba on the case 

An unrecognisable 1970s family

Families, and the justice system, are almost unrecognisable from how things were in the 1970s. 

There is a greater understanding of the benefits of alternative dispute resolution, and the complex needs of clients from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds or with disabilities. 

There is also increased recognition that family violence can manifest as coercion or control, by stalking, unreasonably withholding financial support, and preventing a family member from maintaining contact with friends and relatives.

Recognising that there has not been a generalised review of the Family Law Act 1975 since its commencement in 1976, Attorney General George Brandis last year directed the Australian Law Reform Commission to consider what reforms to the family law system as a whole are necessary or desirable.  

The focus of the ALRC's inquiry is on the experience of individual clients in the family law system. Its terms of reference are directed at how the Act can meet the contemporary needs of families, maintain public understanding and confidence in the family law system, encourage the resolution of disputes efficiently, inexpensively and with finality, and place the needs of children first. 

The commission is also to consider reforms in relation to family violence and child abuse, the protection of vulnerable witnesses, and equipping decision-makers to assess the best interests of children and the children's own views on the family dispute.  

Perhaps the most significant element of the inquiry is the examination "whether the adversarial court system offers the best way to support the safety of families and resolve matters in the best interests of children". 

The ALRC's report is due in March 2019. It released its first Issues Paper on March 14. One of the issues identified in the paper is the financial burden of access to legal services, and how difficult it is for children and individuals with language or literacy barriers to access clear information about family law. 

The issues paper identifies programs in the family law system that seek to empower clients by supporting them through the stressful experience of going to court. The Family Advocacy and Support Service (FASS), currently operating as a pilot program in 23 family law registries, teams clients with duty lawyers and specialist family violence support workers to provide legal and non-legal support. 

The service can provide referrals to other services such as counselling, drug and alcohol support organisations. This pilot is funded until 2019. 

The issues paper also notes the support given by Neighbourhood Justice Officers at the Neighbourhood Justice Centre in Collingwood, Melbourne. The NJC is a multi-jurisdictional court which delivers "therapeutic justice". 

It is non-adversarial, with its focus on community capacity building, treatment and examining the issues underlying why the proceeding arose in the first place. 

Neighbourhood Justice Officers assist clients to navigate the system, and connect clients with services. To be referred to the NJC, the events giving rise to the legal proceeding must have occurred in the City of Yarra. 

The ALRC is interested in how these models can be expanded to meet complex needs. In its paper, the commission suggests that technology is one means of assisting families, e.g. the UK's CourtNav program,  which assists self-represented clients to understand procedural requirements. 

The ALRC is pressing on with examining programs and court models that seek to build legal literacy and empower clients.  

The paper also notes that judges' limited understanding of capacity and disability can be a barrier to access to justice. 

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (to which Australia is a party) encourages states to engage with "supported decision-making". 

This is a collaborative process where a person with a disability asserts their own legal capacity, and a litigation guardian's role is to communicate the person's will and intention to others. 

Substitute decision-making occurs where a litigation guardian makes decisions on behalf of a person with a disability, which can amount to a denial of legal capacity. The ALRC suggests that supported decision-making should be better promoted in family law processes. 

An approach to the justice system which is supportive of disputants is manifest not only through innovative "navigation assistance" programs but in new court architecture. On April 3, the $73 million Shepparton Law Courts opened to the public, designed to "transform the way people in the area access justice services, particularly those affected by family violence". 

The courts are light-filled and include safe waiting areas and clear pathways designed to avoid confrontation between litigants.  

From: Elif Sekercioglu

Reader Comments

There are no comments for this journal entry. To create a new comment, use the form below.
Member Account Required
You must have a member account on this website in order to post comments. Log in to your account to enable posting.