U3AOS1 Topic 8: The Victorian court hierarchy

Key Knowledge Dot Point:

1. The reasons for the Victorian court hierarchy in determining criminal cases, including specialisation and appeals.

Preface:

1. Typically, exam questions focus on two main components for this topic. Firstly, they will ask about the reasons for the Victorian court hierarchy in determining criminal cases. As the study design dot point mentions specialisation and appeals, only reference these two reasons. Do not confuse these with the reasons for the Victorian court hierarchy in determining civil cases, which are appeals and administrative convenience. When talking about why the Victorian court hierarchy is necessary, be explicit about how the use of specialisation or appeals in the court hierarchy benefits how criminal cases are resolved. Do not just state that appeals achieve achieve y or specialisation achieves x--you need to elaborate on how appeals achieve y and how specialisation achieves x. Otherwise, you are not answering the question properly. Additionally, ensure that information related to the jurisdictions is clearly understood. This is 1/2 content and you should be familiar with it already. For high-scoring responses, the focus typically involves discussing or evaluating the ability of the Victorian court hierarchy to achieve the principles of justice in a criminal case, as specified in the key skills section of the study design. 

The two reasons for the Victorian court hierarchy in determining criminal cases:

1. Appeals.
2. Specialisation.

Jurisdictions of the courts in the Victorian court hierarchy:

Appeals:

1. Appeals allow an unsatisfied party to have the decision in their criminal case potentially reviewed by a higher court.
2. An appeal is not an automatic right. That is, the parties must have valid grounds for an appeal to lodge one. These grounds include appealing the sanction imposed, appealing on a question of law, and appealing the conviction.
3. Having a court hierarchy arranged according to levels of superiority and authority means that decisions from lower courts can be reviewed by higher courts.
4. Potentially erroneous decisions in lower courts can be corrected and rectified in higher courts if the case is reviewed by a higher court.

Note: It is not necessary to know the grounds for an appeal in-depth, but having a general idea of them is quite beneficial. Also, when talking about this reason, be really explicit about how its through the court hierarchy being arranged according to levels of superiority and authority that allows for appeals to be fostered in the criminal justice system. In addition, talk about how this is specifically beneficial for determining criminal cases.

Specialisation:

1. Specialisation refers to the process of a court developing expertise in hearing certain types of cases. 
2. Is facilitated by the original jurisdictions of the court hierarchy, which allow certain courts to become experienced in hearing specific types of cases. For example, the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Victoria - Trial Division means that its justices have expertise in laws for the most serious indictable offences, such as murder.
3. Can allow for criminal matters to be resolved in an effective and timely efficient manner.

Note: When talking about this reason, be really explicit about how its fostered through the court hierarchy being arranged according to levels of superiority and authority that allows for different courts to gain expertise in hearing certain types of offences from their original jurisdictions. Also, talk about how this benefits the resolution of criminal cases.

The Victorian court hierarchy and its ability to uphold the principles of justice: fairness, equality and access

How the Victorian court hierarchy achieves fairness:

1. The Victorian court hierarchy promotes fairness by enabling specialisation within different levels of the court system. As each court focuses on particular types of offences and legal matters, judicial officers develop specialised knowledge and experience in those areas of law. This expertise allows judges and magistrates to manage proceedings effectively, apply legal principles accurately, and ensure that trials are conducted through open, impartial, and consistent processes. As a result, cases are more likely to be decided fairly and according to law, supporting just outcomes for all parties involved.

How the Victorian court hierarchy does not achieve fairness:

1. Although the court hierarchy is designed to correct errors through the appeals process, some offenders may be unable to appeal a decision due to the high costs associated with lodging and conducting an appeal. Where financial barriers prevent access to higher courts, errors in the original decision may go uncorrected. As a result, the court hierarchy may fail to deliver fair outcomes for all individuals, as access to error correction is not equally available regardless of an offender’s financial circumstances.

How the Victorian court hierarchy achieves equality:

1. The court hierarchy facilitates the right to appeal, ensuring that all parties have an equal opportunity to challenge a court’s decision, regardless of characteristics such as race, sex, or gender. Provided that an appeal is made on valid legal grounds and, where required, leave to appeal is granted by the judicial officer, parties are able to access a higher court for review. This promotes equality before the law by ensuring that access to appellate review is based on legal merit rather than personal characteristics.

How the Victorian court hierarchy does not achieve equality:

1. Appeals are not equally accessible to all parties due to the significant costs involved. While the Office of Public Prosecutions, as a government-funded body, has the resources to initiate and pursue appeals, many accused persons lack the financial capacity to do so. As a result, individuals from lower socioeconomic backgrounds may be disadvantaged, as they may be unable to challenge wrongful convictions or inappropriate sentences. This undermines equality before the law by allowing access to appellate review to depend on financial resources rather than legal merit.

How the Victorian court hierarchy achieves access:

1. The court hierarchy promotes access to justice by facilitating the appeals process, allowing judicial decisions to be reviewed by higher courts. This enables accused persons to challenge errors of law, fact, or procedure and seek correction of unjust outcomes. By providing a structured pathway for review, the court hierarchy enhances an individual’s ability to engage meaningfully with the justice system and ensures that decisions are not final without the opportunity for oversight and accountability.
2. Access to the court system is enhanced through the specialisation of courts within the Victorian court hierarchy. As judges and magistrates develop expertise in the specific types of matters heard by their court, cases can be managed and resolved more efficiently. This increased efficiency helps minimise delays, allowing a greater number of criminal matters to be finalised within a reasonable timeframe and enabling more individuals to access the criminal justice system in a timely manner.
3. 
   

How the Victorian court hierarchy does not achieve access:

1. Access to the appeals process is limited by the requirement that valid grounds for appeal must exist and, in some cases, leave to appeal must be granted by the court. Where these requirements are not met, parties may be prevented from having their case reviewed by a higher court, even if they believe the outcome was unjust. As a result, access to appellate review is restricted, limiting the ability of some individuals to engage fully with the justice system.
2. The cost of obtaining legal representation for the appeals process can be prohibitive for individuals without sufficient financial resources. As appeals often require specialised legal expertise, associated solicitor and barrister fees may prevent accused persons from pursuing a review of their case. This financial barrier limits an individual’s ability to engage with the criminal justice system and undermines access to justice by restricting appellate review to those who can afford it.