Masters of Court Management
Faculty of Law
Vsindilok, Natacha, A comparison of the case flow management and case tracking systems of the Central Administrative Court of Thailand with those of the Federal Court of Australia, with reference to practice in the USA, M.Court.Mgmt. thesis, Faculty of Law, 2004. http://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/412
Case flow management (CFM) is recognised as an essential component for the success of the overall management in contemporary courts. Case flow management programmes are adopted and implemented in many courts and tribunals across many nations to improve the courts� supervision of time and events from the beginning of cases to their finalisation. The case tracking system (CTS) is the most common tool in an automated case flow management system, providing crucial information to trace and track cases. The Administrative Court of Thailand and the Office of the Administrative Courts employ two such systems to promote overall court management. They are keen to improve and adjust the case tracking system, which is the main tool the Administrative Court's judges and executive judges employ in supervising case progress and enhancing the courts� overall capacity. The central aim of this thesis is to make a contribution to the improvement of the case flow and case tracking systems of the Administrative Court. With this goal in sight, the thesis examines various aspects of the two systems in three stages. The first stage is the investigation of general principles, objectives and practices from United States of America perspective and a comparison of general principles, objectives and practices between those of the Federal Court of Australia (representing common law and adversarial systems) and the Thai Administrative Court (representing civil law and inquisitorial systems). The comparative study between the two courts includes the historical background of the establishment of these courts and their case flow management and case tracking systems. The implementation of the case flow management and case tacking systems of the Administrative Court is analysed from the perspectives of three groups of users: judges, case officials and parties to cases. Interviews were conducted with selected judges and high-ranking court officials on various aspects of court policy and practice. Methodologically, I view the interviews are used as a primary source of data. The opinions of non-executive judges and case officials on various issues of the Court's case flow and case management systems were sought by questionnaire. The questionnaires were also distributed to parties who have experienced the Court's case management in order to gain the perspectives of an external group. Consequently, the actual implementation of the Court's policies in the two systems and the perceptions of the efficiency and achievements of such systems are explored in a practical way. A review of the literature was conducted and interviews undertaken with selected experts in court and case management in the Federal Court. The aim of these theoretical and comparative stages was to provide a thorough understanding of the Administrative Court and its case flow management and case tracking systems. Finally, the thesis attempts to identify the shortcomings of the case flow management and case tracking systems which emerge from the results of the two earlier stages of this study. Recommendations are then made to improve the functioning of the two systems in various areas. It is suggested that the effectiveness of the CFM can be developed in specific ways in the following areas: (i) timestandards for case flow management; (ii) timestandards for case finalisation: (iii) standards for monthly judicial output; (iv) investigation of the scope of the use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) by judges and case officials and the establishment of a 'Settlement Division' for dealing with the suitable administrative cases; (v) adoption and adjustment of differentiated case management (DCM) techniques; and (vi) 'Administrative Case System Programme (ACSP) Improvement Plan'. Suggested core measures to achieve the overall objectives of the implementation of the case flow management systems are to: (i) provide education to the public and encourage and increase parties' accountability, (ii) implement and enforce the suggested timestandards for case flow management and the suggested timestandards on case finalisation, (iii) enhance judicial knowledge by a 'peer group educating system', (iv) refine the case allocation system by employing an adjusted DCM technique and a nominating system, (v) standardise the judges' managerial role by enforcing suggested timestandards and by forming a research group to develop models for judge's writing styles for judgements, orders and statements, (vi) develop and execute a formal and practical plan for the improvement of the case tracking system (as suggested in the 'ACSP Improvement Plan' and other IT systems, (vii) revise and lay down the functioning of the 'Censor Division', (viii) enhance the knowledge of the Court's IT officers, and (ix) provide continuity and high standard for case officials' seminars and training programmes. To assess improvement in the overall court performance and its case flow management, the proposals for an 'Administrative Court Performance Measurement Scheme' (developed from the Trial Court Performance Standard) and an 'Administrative Court Case Flow Management Improvement Project' are developed.
02Whole.pdf (1895 kB)