Courtroom Observation Report: Procedural Fairness and Conduct of Judge

This report discusses the importance of procedural fairness in courtrooms and the conduct of judges. It includes observations of a specific court case and the judge's behavior towards the parties involved. The report covers aspects such as neutrality, respect, and voice, and evaluates the judge's conduct in each of these areas. The case observed was a tort claim based on negligence, and the judge's conduct was found to be fair and impartial towards both parties.

Courtroom Observation Report
University:___________________________________
Name:_______________________________________
Student Number: _____________________________
Unit:________________________________________
Introduction
There are two main sources of law in Australia, case law or common law, based on
the decisions of judges in the superior courts, and legislation, the law made by
Parliament. Because of the Federal system of Government in Australia, we have:
1. Court decisions and legislation made by Federal Courts and Federal
Parliament, and
2. Court decisions and legislation made by State Courts and State Parliaments.
Judges are responsible for making decisions in court are critical to the system
achieving procedural fairness and in turn engendering community trust in authorities
Instrumental in the process is the conduct of the Judge. Body language and
behavioural aspects such as voice, neutrality, and respectful treatment are central to
how the court system is perceived.
Judges must be aware and pay attention to creating fair outcomes, they should also
tailor their actions, language, and responses to the public’s expectations of
procedural fairness. By doing so, these judges will establish themselves as legitimate
authorities; substantial research suggests that increased compliance with court
orders and decreased recidivism by criminal offenders will result. Procedural fairness
also will lessen the difference in how minority populations perceive and react to the
courts.
______________________________________________________________________ 1
Court Observation Exercise v1 2018
Aims of the observation

This court observation report aims to help you to understand the courts process and how
the major parties conduct themselves in court.
Task
You are to visit the Downing Centre Court complex in Liverpool Street Sydney and observe a
court case. You should then complete the attached form and hand in to your lecturer.
Court Visited: District Court
Judge Name: Judge Levy SC
Court Location: Downing Centre Court Complex, Liverpool Street Sydney
Date(s) of observation: 28.03.2018
Type(s) of proceedings observed: Civil
Was the judge aware of this observation? No.
Neutrality
People bring their disputes to the court because they view judges as neutral,
principled decision makers who make decisions based upon rules and not personal
opinions, and who apply legal rules consistently across people and over cases.
Tom Tyler, “Procedural Justice and the Courts,” Court Review
Consider, for example, whether the judge:
§ displayed judicial fairness and impartiality toward all parties;
§ acted in the interests of the parties without regard to personal prejudices;
§ listened carefully and impartially;
§ applied rules consistently across people and over cases;
§ maintained a neutral demeanor or expression while in court;
§ was open, clear, and transparent about how the rules of law were applied and how
decisions were being made;
§ consistently treated participants equally and displayed behavior appropriate for the
situation;
§ was unhurried, patient and careful.
1. How would you describe this judge’s ability to be neutral, principled and
consistent?
The case observed in Court was Webb v. Edwards [2018] NSWDC 67. This was a tort claim based on
negligence. The neutrality of the judge was clearly evident from the fact that despite the claim of the Plaintiff to
the tune of $ 2,076,707.88 his contributory negligence was accounted for and thus the payable damages by the
defendant was reduced to $1,661,366.20. However, Judge Levy also ordered for the payment of costs by
defendant which shows that the loss incurred by the plaintiff was considered by the Judge even when account
for his contributory negligence. He additionally left the option open to each party to show that they may be
entitled to a different order for costs based on any law in force at the time.
______________________________________________________________________ 2 Court
Observation Exercise v1 2018

Respect
Respect includes treating people well, that is, with courtesy and politeness, and showing
respect for people’s rights.
Providing people with information about what to do, where to go, and when to appear, all
demonstrate respect for both those people and their right to have their problems handled
fairly by the courts.
Tom Tyler, “Procedural Justice and the Courts,” Court Review
Consider, for example, whether the judge:
§ provided participants with specific information about what to do, where to go, and when to appear;
§ treated everyone with courtesy, dignity, and respect;
§ maintained appropriate courtroom tone & atmosphere;
§ demonstrated appropriate consideration for the rights of all persons in the court;
§ demonstrated an intention to do what is right for everyone involved;
§ helped interested parties understand decisions and what parties must do as a result;
§ used clear language when speaking to jurors, litigants, witnesses, and attorneys;
§ demonstrated respect for people’s time and acknowledged their patience as needed;
§ demonstrated interest in the needs, problems, and concerns of participants;
§ seemed prepared for the proceedings;
§ demonstrated appropriate body language (e.g., eye contact, facial expressions, posture, attire);
§ demonstrated respectful voice quality (e.g., pitch, volume, tone);
§ clearly articulated awareness of the practical impact on the parties of the judge’s rulings, including
the effect of delay and increased litigation expense;
§ clearly explained the reasons for his/her decisions when appropriate.
2. How would you describe this judge’s respect for people and their rights?
Judge Levy displayed immense respect for people and their rights. This was observed from the manner in
which each side to the dispute was given lengthy opportunities to make out their case. Judge levy heard both
sides at length and did not seek clarifications in any proceeding unless pertaining to the rights of the parties. He
laid down a structured decision that discusses all relevant points of law thus gave ample representation to both
sides to establish their contentions. Furthermore, the judge allowed the defendant to provide expert evidence
which helped establish contributory negligence on behalf of the plaintiff. Thus it established that Judge Levy’s
decision would give equal consideration to both parties and decide on what would be the best turn of events for
all parties involved.
Voice
People want to have the opportunity to tell their side of the story in their own words before
decisions are made about how to handle the dispute or problem. Having an opportunity to
voice their perspective has a positive effect upon people’s experience with the legal system
irrespective of their outcome, as long as they feel that the authority sincerely considered their
arguments before making their decisions.
Tom Tyler, “Procedural Justice and the Courts,” Court Review
Consider, for example, whether the judge:
§ allowed participants to voice their perspectives/arguments;
______________________________________________________________________ 3
Court Observation Exercise v1 2018

§ demonstrated to the parties that their story or perspective had been heard;
§ behaved in a manner that showed the judge had fully considered the case as presented
through witnesses, arguments, and documents before the court;
§ attended, where appropriate, to the participants’ comprehension of the proceedings.
3. How would you describe this judge’s skill at providing the participants a
voice in the proceedings?
Judge levy patiently heard both parties and considered the plaintiff’s past position before and after the
accident in question to fully determine the medical conditions that may be attributed to his contributory
negligence. The past medical records and opinions of both his present and past doctors were considered. In
addition to this the defendant’s expert evidence was also taken into consideration as it was medical evidence and
was beyond the ordinary knowledge of the jury. Thus, following common law principles, this expert evidence
was admissible as held by the Judge. Thus, each party to the dispute received ample opportunities to make out
their contentions in light of the circumstance and laws in force at that time. This establishes that Judge Levy
provided each party with a voice in the proceedings.
4. If you were to appear before this judge as a litigant, would you have confidence
that this judge would treat you fairly? Why or why not?
From the above discussions it may be inferred that Judge Levy is fair and adheres to due process of law. Despite
the case being more in favour of the plaintiff the Judge ensured that all arguments put forward by the defendant
are carefully interpreted in light of the circumstances and ensured that the plaintiff’s burden of proof were
strictly adhered to. Further the Judge mandated that all surrounding circumstances, past and present, are looked
into before ruling in favour of the plaintiff. The balance of probabilities established the plaintiff’s claim and by
virtue of this Judge Levy imposed the damages to paid by the defendant. Thus, Judge levy’s strict affinity
towards fairness is amply clear from the judgment pronounced and I would have complete faith in the fairness
of proceedings before him.

______________________________________________________________________ 4 Court
Observation Exercise v1 2018