The Court of Civil Jurisdiction was a court established in the late 18th century, in the colony of New South Wales which subsequently became a state of Australia. The court had jurisdiction to deal with all civil disputes in the then fledgling colony. It was in operation between 1788, the date of establishment of the new colony, and 1814.
The British government established the colony of New South Wales primarily as a penal colony with the intention of encouraging later settlement. The colony's principal purpose was to house prisoners from Great Britain. Captain Arthur Phillip was appointed as the colony's first governor.
The British authorities foresaw the need for a judicial system to be established in the colony to deal with civil matters. This was to be the present court, styled as the "Court of Civil Jurisdiction", and established by a charter, as well a Court of Vice-Admiralty pursuant to letters from the High Admiralty in Great Britain. In time, the colony would take to authorising justices of the peace to determine smaller debt claims that were taking up the time of these original civil courts established. The institution of these first courts in the then fledgling colony were important first steps in establishment of the rule of law in Australia.
The court was created by the First Charter of Justice, issued by King George III in the form of letters patent dated 2 April 1787. [1] The Court of Civil Jurisdiction as established by the Charter was composed of the Deputy Judge Advocate of New South Wales, who was commonly known in the colony as the "judge-advocate", and two other persons appointed to the court by the Governor of New South Wales. The judge-advocate was the presiding officer. The court had jurisdiction to hear and determine summarily actions relating to land, houses, debt, contract, trespass, and most other common law or equitable cases of any amount.
The court was abolished by the Second Charter of Justice, issued on 4 February 1814; it was replaced by the Supreme Court of Civil Judicature. [1]
The first deputy judge-advocate was David Collins who held office from 1788 until 1796. He was temporarily replaced by Richard Bowyer Atkins until Richard Dore arrived in 1798.
Dore was the first judge-advocate with legal qualifications. He died in 1800. Atkins was re-appointed and held office until late 1809, although he was temporarily deposed during the Rum Rebellion of 1808. At the end of 1809, Ellis Bent, a barrister, arrived from England to take up the appointment as judge-advocate. He held the office until his death on 10 November 1815 and was the last judge-advocate to preside in the court before it was abolished when it was replaced by the Supreme Court of Civil Judicature, the Governors Court and Lieutenant Governor's Court.
A case was commenced by a complaint made in writing by the plaintiff. After lodging it with the judge advocate, the judge advocate would issue a warrant to the provost marshal stating the substance of the complaint. The provost marshal would then summon the defendant to appear before the court. If the amount in dispute exceeded £10, the provost marshal was directed to bring the defendant personally into court. The defendant could instead provide bail for his or her appearance. In the latter case, the defendant was required to find security for the amount of the judgment and deliver it to the provost marshal.
Proceedings would begin with the judge advocate administering an oath to each of the other officers of the court appointed by the governor for that sitting. The officers after having been sworn would then swear in the judge advocate. Witnesses on either side, but not the parties themselves were sworn and examined. This was common practice in English courts at the time. The evidence of the witnesses was taken down in writing and signed by them. After all the evidence was given, the court would consider its judgment. The court's judgment was given "according to justice and right" and sometimes not according to the existing common law or the law on equity. For example, the first case before the court Cable v Sinclair [2] involved two ex-convicts suing a master of a ship for loss of luggage. Under English law at the time, a criminal would be unable to sue in a court of law. However, the court in this case overlooked that and gave judgment in favour of the convicts.
If a plaintiff was successful before the court, the plaintiff could obtain a warrant of execution against the defendant's goods and chattels (called fieri facias). This in effect allowed the provost marshal to seize the defendant's goods and sell them, subsequently paying the proceeds to the plaintiff. Alternatively, the defendant could be imprisoned until the debt and costs were satisfied. As in English law, the plaintiff was required to maintain the debtor in prison by paying what was called groats. The defendant could say on oath that he had no means of maintaining himself in prison. If this occurred, the plaintiff had to provide maintenance for him in prison according to the order of the Court. If the amount ordered by the court was not paid for one week, the debtor could be discharged from prison and also discharged from the debt.
There was a right of appeal to the governor from a decision of the court. An appeal had to be lodged with the governor within eight days of the decision of the court. The governor sat on appeal with the judge advocate as an advisor.
If the appellant was unsuccessful before the governor and the amount involved exceeded £300 sterling, the unsuccessful appellant might go further by appealing to the British Privy Council. An appeal in that case had to be lodged within fourteen days. Only one recorded appeal from this court was heard by the Privy Council. [3] [4]
The first civil case under English law in Australia was Cable v Sinclair, heard on 1 July 1788. David Collins was presiding as judge-advocate with the Reverend Richard Johnson and John White appointed as the other members of the court. The case concerned the loss of baggage on the voyage of the First Fleet from England to Botany Bay and Port Jackson, now known as Sydney. After hearing evidence, the court found in favour of the plaintiff and awarded damages against the ship's master. Bruce Kercher notes that this decision goes against the then English principles of law relating to "convict attaint" which provides that a prisoner under sentence of death was unable to sue or hold property. Henry and Susannah Cable both were sentenced to death but had their sentence commuted to transportation, so under law, they were not entitled to sue. [2] Its other important cases are online. [5]
The legal status of the court has been debated. Under English law at the time, the monarch could only establish common law courts in settled lands, which the English had considered the colony of New South Wales to be. However, equitable and other types of courts could not be established except by an Act of Parliament made by the Imperial Parliament of Great Britain. This position was recognised by the Supreme Court of New South Wales in 1832 in Harris v. Riley [1832] NSWSupC 76 [6] when the court under Chief Justice Francis Forbes held that the Court of Civil Jurisdiction did not have an equitable jurisdiction and that the decision of the court in that particular case was void.
The court had outlived its original purpose by the early 19th century. There was a growing clamour in the colony for a legally qualified judge to head the superior court of the colony. The settlement in Van Diemen's Land was also not being properly serviced by the court as the court sat only in Sydney. The court was loath to undertake the long journey to Hobart to conduct sittings.
Recommendations had been made by Ellis Bent to the British authorities along those lines for reform of the courts in the colony. In 1814, the British sovereign established three new courts to replace the court. These were the Supreme Court of Civil Judicature, the Governors Court and the Lieutenant Governor's Court. The court ceased sitting in 1814 as a result of the revocation of its charter.
English law is the common law legal system of England and Wales, comprising mainly criminal law and civil law, each branch having its own courts and procedures.
A lawsuit is a proceeding by one or more parties against one or more parties in a civil court of law. The archaic term "suit in law" is found in only a small number of laws still in effect today. The term "lawsuit" is used with respect to a civil action brought by a plaintiff who requests a legal remedy or equitable remedy from a court. The defendant is required to respond to the plaintiff's complaint or else risk default judgment. If the plaintiff is successful, judgment is entered in favor of the defendant. A variety of court orders may be issued in connection with or as part of the judgment to enforce a right, award damages or restitution, or impose a temporary or permanent injunction to prevent an act or compel an act. A declaratory judgment may be issued to prevent future legal disputes.
Admiralty courts, also known as maritime courts, are courts exercising jurisdiction over all maritime contracts, torts, injuries, and offences.
The courts of England and Wales, supported administratively by His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service, are the civil and criminal courts responsible for the administration of justice in England and Wales.
In the history of the courts of England and Wales, the Judicature Acts were a series of Acts of Parliament, beginning in the 1870s, which aimed to fuse the hitherto split system of courts of England and Wales. The first two Acts were the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873 and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1875, with a further series of amending acts.
The court system of Canada forms the country's judiciary, formally known as "The King on the Bench", which interprets the law and is made up of many courts differing in levels of legal superiority and separated by jurisdiction. Some of the courts are federal in nature, while others are provincial or territorial.
The legal system of Singapore is based on the English common law system. Major areas of law – particularly administrative law, contract law, equity and trust law, property law and tort law – are largely judge-made, though certain aspects have now been modified to some extent by statutes. However, other areas of law, such as criminal law, company law and family law, are almost completely statutory in nature.
The Supreme Court of New South Wales is the highest state court of the Australian State of New South Wales. It has unlimited jurisdiction within the state in civil matters, and hears the most serious criminal matters. Whilst the Supreme Court is the highest New South Wales court in the Australian court hierarchy, an appeal by special leave can be made to the High Court of Australia.
The Supreme Court of Singapore is a set of courts in Singapore, comprising the Court of Appeal and the High Court. It hears both civil and criminal matters. The Court of Appeal hears both civil and criminal appeals from the High Court. The Court of Appeal may also decide a point of law reserved for its decision by the High Court, as well as any point of law of public interest arising in the course of an appeal from a court subordinate to the High Court, which has been reserved by the High Court for decision of the Court of Appeal.
The High Court of Singapore is the lower division of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the upper division being the Court of Appeal. The High Court consists of the chief justice and the judges of the High Court. Judicial Commissioners are often appointed to assist with the Court's caseload. There are two specialist commercial courts, the Admiralty Court and the Intellectual Property Court, and a number of judges are designated to hear arbitration-related matters. In 2015, the Singapore International Commercial Court was established as part of the Supreme Court of Singapore, and is a division of the High Court. The other divisions of the high court are the General Division, the Appellate Division, and the Family Division. The seat of the High Court is the Supreme Court Building.
The Court of Appeal of Singapore is the highest court in the judicial system of Singapore. It is the upper division of the Supreme Court of Singapore, the lower being the High Court. The Court of Appeal consists of the chief justice, who is the president of the Court, and the judges of the Court of Appeal. The chief justice may ask judges of the High Court to sit as members of the Court of Appeal to hear particular cases. The seat of the Court of Appeal is the Supreme Court Building.
In most legal jurisdictions, a supreme court, also known as a court of last resort, apex court, and highcourt of appeal, is the highest court within the hierarchy of courts. Broadly speaking, the decisions of a supreme court are not subject to further review by any other court. Supreme courts typically function primarily as appellate courts, hearing appeals from decisions of lower trial courts, or from intermediate-level appellate courts.
The Governors Court was a court established in the early 19th century in the colony of New South Wales. The colony was subsequently to become a state of Australia in 1901. The court had jurisdiction to deal with civil disputes where the amount in dispute in the colony was not more than £50 sterling. The Supreme Court of New South Wales replaced the court in 1823 when the Supreme Court was created by the Third Charter of Justice.
The Lieutenant Governor's Court was a court established in the early 19th century in the colony of Van Diemen's Land which subsequently became Tasmania, a state of Australia. The court had jurisdiction to deal with civil disputes where the amount in dispute was not more than £50 sterling in the colony. The establishment of the court was the first practical civil court in the settlement. This was an important first step in improving the resolution of civil disputes in the settlement. The Supreme Court of Van Diemen's Land eventually replaced it in 1823 when the court's charter was revoked by the Third Charter of Justice.
The Supreme Court of Civil Judicature of New South Wales was a court established in the early 19th century in the colony of New South Wales. The colony was subsequently to become a state of Australia in 1901. The court had jurisdiction to deal with civil disputes where the amount in dispute in the colony was more than £50 sterling. The Supreme Court of New South Wales replaced the court in 1823 when the Supreme Court was created by the Third Charter of Justice.
The Vice Admiralty Court was a prerogative court established in the late 18th century in the colony of New South Wales, which was to become a state of Australia. A vice admiralty court is in effect an admiralty court. The word "vice" in the name of the court denoted that the court represented the Lord Admiral of the United Kingdom. In English legal theory, the Lord Admiral, as vice-regal of the monarch, was the only person who had authority over matters relating to the sea. The Lord Admiral would authorize others as his deputies or surrogates to act. Generally, he would appoint a person as a judge to sit in the Court as his surrogate. By appointing Vice-Admirals in the colonies, and by constituting courts as Vice-Admiralty Courts, the terminology recognized that the existence and superiority of the "mother" court in the United Kingdom. Thus, the "vice" tag denoted that whilst it was a separate court, it was not equal to the "mother" court. In the case of the New South Wales court, a right of appeal lay back to the British Admiralty Court, which further reinforced this superiority. In all respects, the court was an Imperial court rather than a local Colonial court.
The Federal Court of Malaysia is the highest court and the final appellate court in Malaysia. It is housed in the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya. The court was established during Malaya's independence in 1957 and received its current name in 1994.
The Court of King's Bench, formally known as The Court of the King Before the King Himself, was a court of common law in the English legal system. Created in the late 12th to early 13th century from the curia regis, the King's Bench initially followed the monarch on his travels. The King's Bench finally joined the Court of Common Pleas and Exchequer of Pleas in Westminster Hall in 1318, making its last travels in 1421. The King's Bench was merged into the High Court of Justice by the Supreme Court of Judicature Act 1873, after which point the King's Bench was a division within the High Court. The King's Bench was staffed by one Chief Justice and usually three Puisne Justices.
The Supreme Court of New South Wales for the District of Port Phillip was an historical division of the Supreme Court of New South Wales, exercising the jurisdiction of that court within the Port Phillip District of New South Wales. It consisted of a single Resident Judge. It existed from 1840 until 1852, when, following the separation of the Port Phillip District to form the Colony of Victoria, it was replaced by the Supreme Court of Victoria.
Accounts of the Indigenous law governing dispute resolution in the area now called Ontario, Canada, date from the early to mid-17th century. French civil law courts were created in Canada, the colony of New France, in the 17th century, and common law courts were first established in 1764. The territory was then known as the province of Quebec.
The oldest Australian case for which records survive is the unreported decision of Lord v Palmer, 1809.