2. Differs according to which court the judge is hearing the
case in
The Magistrates Court will be involved in hearing about
the facts relevant to a particular case
Much of this will involve facts rather than the law
Often different witnesses will have different version of
the facts – the judge in the Magistrates Court will
decide which version is the correct one
The judge will make decisions on issues that arise from
the facts (questions of fact)
Questions of fact: details of what the case is about;
what happened
3. Usually the Magistrates Court will not have much
freedom in deciding which law applies to which
fact
They have virtually no role in changing the law or
developing the law
We can say that (as a general rule) the lower in
the hierarchy the court is, the more involved it will
be in finding out facts, and in applying law to facts
Compare this to the function of judges in the High
Court – the highest court in Australia…
4. High Court judges will have virtually no role in deciding facts
It is extremely rare for HC judges to listen to evidence from
witnesses because the court will rely on the findings of fact made
in the lower court
HC judges will make decision on questions of law
Questions of law: how the law applies to the particular case
They have more freedom in developing the law – they have
some role in changing the law and developing the law in
response to changes in society
We can say that (as a general rule) the higher in the hierarchy
the court is, the more involved it will be in developing the law
5. When there is no relevant law that can be applied to a
current case, a judge can decide that no legal remedy
is available to the plaintiff
The defendant has no legal responsibility to the plaintiff
even though the facts of the case indicate the plaintiff
has suffered injury or damage by the defendant
The judge can, however, decide that in all fairness the
dispute should somehow be resolved
The judge can establish a new legal principal to decide
the case at hand
