New Zealand Department for Courts Case Management System
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
New Zealand Department for Courts
Case Management System
Modernisation Project
New Processes
New Staff Roles
Technology
Within Constraints
Process and Role Design Aims
• Staff – Proactive rather than Reactive
• Aim to achieve Meaningful Events– Registry role– Individual staff responsibility
Practice Notes & Standards
• Practice Notes in place in most jurisdictions and for most case types
• Key Performance Indicators (Standards) have been developed for matters not covered by Practice Notes
The Operational Model Supported by Technology Enables Caseflow Management
Judicial
Technology Core CMS Scheduling &Rostering
Update Case In Court
Tasks and To Dos
Document Management
Registry
• Record entered or updated at counter•Thorough, expert checking
• Improved information
• Access to schedule whenever required
• Update of record in court
•Single point of contact•Reduced hand-overs• Active liaison with parties
• Monitoring case to check progress•Early notification of issues to Judge
•
Receiving & Processing
RolesTaking Court
Scheduling & Rostering
Case Progression
Create Case / Parties
Assign Case to Staff
Charges / Applications
Orders / Sentences
Remands / Warrants
Register Appeals
Judicial Rosters
Court Rosters
Schedule Hearings by Courtroom
Register Documents
Create Expected Documents
Service of Documents
Document Location
Outgoing Documents
One screen “window” into core CMS functionality for speed of data entry
System and / or manually generated Tasks to prompt (by exception) registry staff to take action or monitor for compliance
CASE INITIATED
EVENT SCHEDULED
ISSUES ESCALATED
RECORD UPDATED
COMPLIANCE MANAGED
RECORD UPDATED
Process
ROSTERCOURTROOM/
CHAMBERS EVENT
DIRECTIONS/ ORDERS
MADE
CASE DETERMINED
Process
IT System
• Support for new operational processes
• Support for Caseflow Management
IT System Expectations
• Expectation that data will be entered at the point at which it occurs
• Aim is to have judges and staff confident that they can rely on the accuracy of the system and that it is up to date
Case Management System
In this presentation illustrate:– Recording of Directions– Creation of Expected Documents
resulting from those Directions– System monitoring for receipt of
Expected Documents– System prompts when Expected
Documents overdue
CMS Case Summary Screen shows current court and jurisdiction
Case Summary Screen also shows:•Type of Case
•Current Case Track•Staff member responsible for case
Judicial Directions are Recorded
Drop Down List of DirectionsBased on Case Type
Drop Down List of all Scheduled Events – Select Relevant Date
Populates Direction Date; Effective From date; Judicial Officer
Save Records each Direction
Add new Directions – Add button clears previous Direction and Prepopulates
Event, Dates and Judicial Officer fields. User populates other fields.
To schedule Next Event
User selects event type, required date, Judicial Officer,
sets preferred status and selects to View Schedules
Courtroom Schedule finds suitable hearing activity and highlights in yellow
Event is dragged from clipboard to relevant activity – then save
System populates Event Detail and Event is Saved
User may manually complete this screen or can ask the
system to find suitable dates - not before the entered date
System returns up to three options. Selecting Next will populate the Event Detail
screen.
The latest Direction is displayed on the Case
Summary
New Directions can be added by selecting the New Direction Button
All Directions on the Case can be viewed by selecting the Direction List button
Users can view each Direction by selecting the Details button
Users can navigate (from any screen) to the Document Register using the
Level 2 Menu
CMS registers the required documents as “Expected”
with their due date
Tool tips are used (throughout CMS) to
display text where there is insufficient field space
CMS creates tasks to advise staff when expected documents are not filed by their due date or an earlier
prompt date
Users can navigate (from any screen) to the Case
Task List using the Level 2 Menu
The tasks associated with the Expected Documents appear in the Case Task list if the documents are not registered by
the due date or the prompt dateThey will also display in
the Task Owner’s personal Task List
Various views of the Case Task List can be displayed using filters
The Status of Tasks may be updated by the system or by the
user
Tasks can be added by the user
Task details can be viewed
The Task Owner can record notes for each task
The Expected Document entry can be used to register the document
when it is filed. The relevant document is selected
and the Next button opens the Register Document Window.
Select Filer from Drop Down ListIndicate where document is held on physical file
Link document to Case Entities, as
required and Save
Registration of the document clears it from the Expected view in the
Document RegisterRegistration of the document
updates the related Task to Complete
The task for the Expected Document no longer appears as an open Task.
The Document Register displays all documents registered (or expected)
for a case. In this case all documents associated with the three
applications are displayed.
A Judge or Staff Member can use the filter to identify the documents associated with any of the applications in the case. This is used if only one of the applications is
to be heard at the next event.
Computerised Case Management
The Judicial Perspective
Outline
• Judicial Concerns for Automated Systems
• Benefits for the Judiciary from Case Management System
• Utilisation of CMS by the Judiciary
• Conclusion
Judicial Concerns• Confidence in the ease of transfer
from one jurisdiction to another
• Standardised work systems between jurisdictions - a common judicial interface
• Standard case management principles applicable across all jurisdictions
• An integrated diary system
Problems that CMS Could Resolve
• High staff turnover leading to the use of inexperienced staff;
• Missing or chaotic files;• Court orders or judgments which took too long to be
drawn and were often drawn incorrectly;• Lack of proper administrative support for the
Judiciary;• Lack of Judicial continuity in case management;• Delays in listing due to insufficient Judges requiring
cancellation of Courts and a last minute rescheduling• Poor communications between levels of Courts, Court
staff and Judges;• Trial windows being overfilled.
Judicial Requirements for CMS
• Information Availability and Management of Judicial Time– Availability of relevant information– Electronic Diary system
• Management of Case to Trial– Automatic triggering of events or
requirements for action– Judge works in tandem with the computer
based management system
Advantages for the Judiciary• To obtain information regarding
– the progress of a case to monitor compliance with orders;
– the status for a particular matter for the purposes of planning;
– preparation for a hearing;
– trends in the progress of a case or to determine any management issues that need to be addressed;
• information for Executive Judges
• Access to rosters and management information for Heads of Bench
• In Court allocation of hearing dates
• Automation of repetitive tasks based on case tracking
• Allocation or disqualification of a Judge from hearing
• Management information for Executive Judges
Advantages for the Judiciarycontd.
Using the System• Document Management - in Court preparation
of orders, bail papers etc
• Rostering and Scheduling - better use of judicial resources and Court assets
• Ease of Navigation - by mouse-click
• On-line access to research materials
• Case oriented focus
Conclusion Case management may enhance access to
justice, it may improve confidence in the Court system. It may make the process of adjudication less threatening and less stressful. But as in all circumstances involving a solution for the human condition the purpose of our ultimate mission must not be overlooked – that justice must be accessible, it must be available and it must not discriminate, either in terms of disposition of a case or in terms of its availability to the citizenry.
Related Documents
