High Court as the apex of the Australian judiciary system

COURT OBSERVATION REPORT COURT OBSERVATION REPORT 2 1 COURT OBSERVATION REPORT COURT OBSERVATION REPORT Name of the Student Name of the University Author Note The Australian judicial system consists of judges who sit in the courts located at States and Territories of Australia as well as in the federal courts (Wallace, Roach Anleu & Mack, 2017). Beneath the superior courts lie the inferior courts and they include Magistrates as well as County court of every state together with the Federal Circuit court (Anleu &

Running head: COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
The Australian judicial system consists of judges who sit in the courts located at States
and Territories of Australia as well as in the federal courts (Wallace, Roach Anleu & Mack,
2017). The High Court is considered as the apex of the hierarchy as the ultimate decision is taken
by it (Douglas, Atkins & Clift, 2015). Below it, lie the superior courts which are the Supreme
Courts and Federal court of every State and territory. Beneath the superior courts lie the inferior
courts and they include Magistrates as well as County court of every state together with the
Federal Circuit court (Anleu & Mack, 2017).
Court visit is an important part that provides an insight to the daily affairs of the
courtroom and helps the law students to gain practical knowledge about the legal system of a
state. This court visit forms a very significant part of the law study as it helps to understand and
get acquainted with the working of such court by observing its actual proceedings (Henderson,
Heffer & Kebbell, 2016). In addition to this, the assignment also deals with the discussion of the
welfare system of Australia. As a part of the court visit, in order to enrich myself with the
practical knowledge of the legal system and for analyzing role, purpose together with the
structure of such court, I visited the Magistrates Court (Civil Law Court) Perth, WA. The case
which is observed during this visit is discussed in the later part of the assignment.
For this purpose, I reached the court around 2.15pm on 4th September 2019 and was
present there till 4 pm. After I reached the court, all my personal belongings were checked by
the security guards. This checking by the security guards was done to ensure the security of the
court environment. During this visit, I witnessed the trial of a teenager accused of terrorist
charge.
We were specifically told to keep the cell phones in silent mode or switched it off such
that no disturbance could occur during the hearing. The court is formed according to Magistrates

2COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
Court Act 2004 (WA). It is an inferior type of court and also a court of record. The court also
possesses the civil jurisdiction as per Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (WA). The
court is located at 501 Hay St, Perth WA 6000, Australia. In the Western Australia, the court
hierarchy moves in the upward direction from the Magistrate court to Supreme Court via the
District court (Potter, 2018). All the criminal cases against adult initiate in this jurisdiction. It
mainly deals with the criminal cases summarily and for civil cases, claims up to maximum
75000$ are heard.
For court observation, I visited room 38 located at level 3. When I entered the court
room, I found that all the people stood up in order to show respect to the magistrate. Then the
hearing of the case began. When I visited the court, the court was presided by the magistrate. The
case involved a petty case of a taxi driver named Mr Gill who was issued ticket for traffic
infringement (Fraser, Meuleners & Chow, 2018). He actually parked his taxi in the loading zone
for which he was given the infringement ticket.
During the trial of the case, it is seen that both the family members, friends of the accused
were present. The magistrate was wearing the black gown. The solicitors present were using
laptops together with files containing papers. The traffic officer who issued the ticket was also
present. He explained to the magistrate the charge that was brought against the taxi driver.
He was then informed in details about the charges and the punishment mentioned in those
charges. He was informed that he was issued the ticket for causing the breach of section 2.8 of
the Parking Local Law 2010 pertaining to the Local Government Act 1995. The said section
enumerates about the loading zone. The section states that no person is allowed to park or stop
his vehicle in a loading zone. However there lies an exemption to this rule which states that this
section is not applicable to commercial vehicle and when the person is involved in unloading

3COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
goods from or to that vehicle or such vehicle is an unauthorized vehicle. Moreover it also
enumerates that none should stop or park any authorized or commercial vehicle in this zone for
more than the time specified in the sign present in it and when no time is mentioned on such
sign, then the maximum allowable time is 30 minutes. This section was explained to him. This
showed that a fair trial was held where the accused taxi driver was informed about the offences
he was accused of and the charges that were brought against him (Davidson, 2019).
Then the magistrate asked Gill and the officer to introduce themselves. Further it was
asked by the magistrate to explain why the ticket officer issued ticket to Gill. He replied that he
saw Gill had parked his car in the loading zone with the boot of the car being open. He was
standing by it at the back side of the taxi. The officer then clicked 2 pictures one from the back
and one from front of the car. Then Gill saw him and drove the taxi away from the Loading zone.
He further explained the magistrate that the vehicle is not a commercial one and hence not
permitted to park there. Then the assistant of the magistrate showed those pictures to the accused
and asked him to defend himself.
He said that he was being targeted by the traffic officer as he was an Indian and there was
no such cause behind issuing the ticket to him. Then he was stopped by the magistrate and was
asked to give no excuses that were irrelevant and baseless. To reach a conclusion, the Magistrate
asked him to say whether he parked in the L zone or not. He was further asked whether it was
known to him that it was traffic rules. Then Gill further defended himself that he parked there as
he found the boot was open and the Loading zone was supposed to be the safest place to stop the
car to close the boot. Further he tried to support his point by saying that parking in the L zone
was permitted for pick as well as drop of passengers. However the officer quashed this claim as
by saying that he did not see any passenger getting in or out of his vehicle. By this, the

4COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
magistrate took some time and finally decided that Gill was guilty of parking vehicle in the L
zone by violating the said section and he was fined of 350 dollars.
From the court visit, the importance of the Australian welfare system regarding the safety
of the people from traffic related incidents are discussed. It helps us to understand the traffic law
of the community which indirectly results into the welfare of the Australian people (Sun et al.,
2017). Traffic related cases result into contentious problems when passing of sentence is
considered. It is seen that penalty has been imposed to the driver who has caused the breach of
the traffic rule. Though it sounds hefty, but it is required to make people follow the traffic rules
which if not followed leads to various cases of accidents, deaths. The social scenario is changing
rapidly due to urbanization and the significance of the traffic laws become more prominent. Thus
imposing fine is one of the ways by which people will be compelled to follow the traffic rules
and regulations. The main objective behind these rules is preventing the road users from getting
injured or killed and for that various rules are made under various Acts and Rules. These rules
are not only for the drivers but also for the common people (Hobday & Meuleners, 2018). Thus
it helps in the welfare of the people in an indirect manner.

5COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
References:
Anleu, S. R., & Mack, K. (2017). Lower Courts. In Performing Judicial Authority in the Lower
Courts (pp. 15-29). Palgrave Macmillan, London.
Davidson, S., 2019. Fair Trial Issues. The International Encyclopedia of Journalism Studies,
pp.1-7.
Douglas, J., Atkins, E., & Clift, H. (2015). Judicial Rulings with Prospective Effect in Australia.
In Comparing the Prospective Effect of Judicial Rulings Across Jurisdictions (pp. 349-
358). Springer, Cham.
Fraser, M., Meuleners, L., & Chow, K. (2018, October). Reckless cyclists or impatient drivers?
A naturalistic study of group riding in Perth, Western Australia. In Australasian Road
Safety Conference, 2018, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Henderson, E., Heffer, C., & Kebbell, M. (2016). Courtroom questioning and
discourse. Communication in investigative and legal contexts: Integrated approaches
from forensic psychology, linguistics and law enforcement, 181-208.
Hobday, M., & Meuleners, L. (2018). Child and adolescent pedestrians and cyclists in Western
Australia: how safe are they?.
Local Government Act 1995
Magistrates Court (Civil Proceedings) Act 2004 (WA).
Magistrates Court Act 2004 (WA).
Parking Local Law 2010

6COURT OBSERVATION REPORT
Potter, D. (2018). A view from the bench: Magistrates courts in Western Australia: Part one-
navigating conveyor-belt justice in the general lists. Brief, 45(6), 6.
Sun, Y., Olaru, D., Smith, B., Greaves, S., & Collins, A. (2017). Road to autonomous vehicles in
Australia: an exploratory literature review. Road & Transport Research: A Journal of
Australian and New Zealand Research and Practice, 26(1), 34.
Wallace, A., Roach Anleu, S., & Mack, K. (2017). Judicial work and AV use: perceptions from
Australian courts. Oñati Socio-Legal Series, 7(4).