The courts are facing a shortage of judges to hear disputes involving large sums of money, a problem the court system has struggled with in recent years, and which has created an increasingly complicated legal landscape.
A Fairfax Media investigation has revealed the court’s backlog of more than 700 cases is a third the number of cases it was in the early 2000s.
The Fairfax Media review has revealed more than $1.3 billion in uncollected fees since 2003.
The backlog of cases has led to cases being taken back to the courts and, in some cases, to judges being transferred.
It is also putting a strain on courts’ ability to get around delays in resolving disputes and the need to re-process them when there is a change of venue.
In some cases this is taking longer than anticipated and, as a result, cases are being moved from the courts to a different jurisdiction.
In others, judges have been unable to complete cases.
The result is a situation where the court is trying to work with its court systems to make sure cases are handled correctly.
In one instance, a Fairfax Media analysis has found, a judge who was unable to resolve a case was transferred to the Northern Territory.
“The system of court work is getting worse, not better,” Justice Matthew McDonagh said.
“The problem is we’re seeing a lot of backlogs and we’re having to do a lot more work to get them resolved.”
Justice McDonach said the backlog was a concern, especially for the courts in remote parts of the country.
The court system was not doing a good job of dealing with this problem.
We need to get back to where the system worked the other day when we had to do this [move to the NT] and we had two judges that had been sitting in the courtroom for two months, just waiting for their case to get resolved, he said.
“What we’re doing now is making sure that we don’t have a backlog at all.”
The problem has arisen in a number of ways, including in the courtrooms.
In the Northern Australian Capital Territory, the number and type of cases the court processes are significantly higher than in Victoria.
There, it takes up to eight days to resolve disputes.
In Queensland, a number are resolved in under two weeks.
But in Victoria, the average time is closer to six months.
Justice McDonay said it was not uncommon for the court to process disputes on a weekend or during holidays.
In some cases the case may be taken back on a day after the hearing date has been set.
Some cases are referred to other courts, including the Western Australian Supreme Court and the Northern District Court.
When the time has come to resolve the dispute, the parties have to come to an agreement on a final amount.
But this process can be lengthy and often involves several rounds of mediation and negotiations.
But even with these delays, the court has not always resolved the matter fairly.
And even when it does resolve the matter, the process can often take a long time.
One example is the case of a man who had his home and car seized by police and returned to him and his family.
A week later, he was charged with the same offence and returned home.
After some time, the police contacted him, alleging that he had committed a drug offence.
They took his car and his house, and his money, which they claimed was worth more than the car, he argued.
His lawyer argued that the money was owed to the police and was in his possession.
As part of his bail application, he also sought to have the money sent to the bank where he had stored the money.
He told the court that police officers had been following him, and he did not understand why they were going to keep it.
On appeal, the Supreme Court found the money had been returned to his home, but the matter went back to court for a further hearing.
This time, Justice Mcdonay said the money still wasn’t in his hands.
Instead, he found the police were entitled to keep the money, but he also ordered the police to pay him $600 for the time he had spent with them.
That decision, he ruled, was unreasonable.
However, he allowed the matter to proceed.
Ultimately, the man was able to obtain a refund from the police, but his family did not.
Since then, the issue has been a source of frustration for the Victorian courts, which have been forced to make some changes to how they deal with the problem.