New Legislation: Infringements

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Life sentence in Finland and other Nordic Countries
Advertisements

Auditing, Assurance and Governance in Local Government
APARTMENT OWNERS NETWORK NOVEMBER o Outline the new District Court Procedure o o Service of Proceedings – Problems o Statute of Limitations – 6.

Criminal Law and Procedure LWB 232 Week 13 - Sentencing dispositions.
1 EASTERN CARIBBEAN SUPREME COURT /UNICEF SEMINAR ON JUSTICE FOR CHILDREN for Judiciary, Magistracy, Police and Social Workers in the Eastern Caribbean.
Refresher on structures and processes of the Scottish Courts.
Irish Penal Reform Trust Reforming the Early Release System in Ireland.
The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC)
Refresher on structures and processes of the Scottish Courts.
Understanding decision making - Prosecuting complaints Karen Mobbs Director of Proceedings Health Care Complaints Commission Patrick Griffin Barrister.
TAX ADMINISTRATION ACT, 2011 By Johan Kotze Head of Tax Dispute Resolution.
Data Protection and You Your Rights & The Law Registration Basics Other Activities Disclaimer: This presentation only provides an introductory info. Please.
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. 2 Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due.
Chapter 4 Sentencing and punishment. In this chapter, you will look at the purposes and process of sentencing and the different factors affecting a sentencing.
(POST – TRIAL). The Act states that the sentencing judge is obliged to consider the following when sentencing:  Maximum penalty  Current sentencing.
AARTO Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Act, 1998 (Act No. 46 of 1998, as amended) Presentation to Parliament’s Portfolio Committee.
1 Alberta Association of Police Governance Calgary, Alberta May 1, 2010 Rev
Local Assessment of Code of Conduct Complaints. Background  On 08 May 2008 – the local assessment of Code of Conduct complaints was implemented due to.
1 THE NURSING BILL BRIEFING BY THE NATIONAL DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH CAPE TOWN 15 NOVEMBER 2005.
C OMPANIES ACT,2013 Adv. Arun Saxena Saxena & Saxena Law Chambers Advocates & Attorneys , New Delhi House 27, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi –
ANGLICARE FINANCIAL COUNSELLING CONFERENCE 13 OCTOBER 2015 NEALE BUCHANAN DIRECTOR MONETARY PENALTIES ENFORCEMENT SERVICE.
National Standards for Youth Justice Service 2013: Summary of the key changes.
Community Infrastructure Levy Implementation July 2014.
CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURES. WHAT EXACTLY ARE CRIMINAL PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURES?  Processes and procedures that occur before a trial or hearing commences.
WELCOME S R AGRAWAL. SERVICE TAX VOLUNTARY COMPLIANCE ENCOURAGEMENT SCHEME 2013.
Community Legal Centres Queensland Child protection in Queensland – 2016 legislative amendments webinar 27 May 2016 Nigel A Miller A/Assistant Director,
HIPAA Training Workshop #3 Individual Rights Kaye L. Rankin Rankin Healthcare Consultants, Inc.
Breaking the cycle: effective punishment, rehabilitation and sentencing of offenders Ministry of Justice Green Paper.
Substance Addiction(Compulsory Assessment and Treatment) Act 2017 Processes
Presented by: Antony N. Gichia Regional Audit Center Mombasa
BRIEFING BY THE NATIONAL DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
OUR EFFICENCY DETERMINES OUR PERFORMANCE
Process Overview.
Deleting Pupils and CME WORKSHOP
Fair Go Rates System Dr Ron Ben-David Chairperson
Work and Development Permit Scheme
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 AMENDMENT PROCESS and DOCKET
Courts of Law Amendment Bill
2016 IPWEAvic Public Works Conference
New challenges for archives in Iceland
Rules and Theory of Criminal Law BAIL
Recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments and arbitral awards in Russia Roman Zaitsev, PhD, Partner 05/09/2018.
BRIEFING TO THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON SECURITY AND JUSTICE ON THE INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION ,BILL, 2017 [B10B-2017] 1 NOVEMBER 2017.
Annual general meeting
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN 2017 AMENDMENT PROCESS and DOCKET
AS Level – First Year Pre Entry Advice and Guidance Sessions 2018
Sanctions and Outcomes
Companies Act 2015 (“Act”) Fiji Institute of Accountants Symposium
Criminal Process Bail.
SUBMISSION ON AARTO BILL, 2015
Canadian Navigable Waters Act
Getting to grips with the Homelessness Reduction Act:
Fair Go Rates System Dr Ron Ben-David Chairperson
CRIMINAL SANCTIONS 1. The Purpose of Sanctioning
CRIMINAL SANCTIONS Purposes Types Factors in sentencing
Complaints Investigation Presenter: Ms H Phetoane Senior Investigator :HealthCare Cases Prepared for OHSC Consultative Workshops.
Complaints Investigation Presenter: Ms H Phetoane Senior Investigator :HealthCare Cases Prepared for OHSC Consultative Workshops.
Complaints Investigation Presenter: Ms H Phetoane Senior Investigator :HealthCare Cases Prepared for OHSC Consultative Workshops.
Graham Faulkner Branch Director, EweMove Dorking
Enforcement under the Companies Act ODCE Update Kevin Prendergast Head of Enforcement, ODCE
Confidentiality Frequently Asked Questions
ALRB Responses to Recent Legislative Changes
Transmission Workstream 2nd December 2010
Government Data Practices & Open Meeting Law Overview
Implementation of the provisions of the Criminal Law (Forensic Procedures) Amendment Bill in respect of persons detained in DCS Correctional and Remand.
Te Karearea Strategic Partnership Forum
Review of the Family Law System: Discussion Paper Overview
THE BAILIFFS ACT, CHAPTER 4:61
Overview of eCourts/Tribunal Plan (WA)
Presentation transcript:

New Legislation: Infringements Infringement Management and Enforcement Services New Legislation: Infringements FCRC Professional Development Session June 2017 CD/17/75009

What we will cover today Infringement Management and Enforcement Services What we will cover today Fines reform Internal review Enforcement review Time served scheme Changes to Sentencing Act Q & A Save questions to the end

Fines reform overview Fines reform Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Fines reform Fines reform overview

Fines Reform A new fines recovery model A new body: Fines Victoria Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Fines Reform A new fines recovery model A new body: Fines Victoria Main changes 31 December 2017 Some early changes 1 July 2017 Overhaul of the current infringements system Fines Victoria Director, Fines Victoria: responsible for the collection and enforcement of infringement fines and court fines central, accessible body for the public to deal with in relation to fines easier for people to access the system, understand total debt, and make payments easier by providing consistent options and methods More efficient system Focus on the individual - holistic More options for vulnerable people

Staged implementation of Fines Reform Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Staged implementation of Fines Reform 1 changes to internal review work and development permits more consistent court powers improved ‘time served' scheme ‘Early commencement’ Infringements Act 2006 by 1 July 2017 Fines Victoria replaces Infringements Court shortened infringements lifecycle enforcement review replaces revocation consolidated payment arrangements collection and enforcement of court fines Fines Reform Act 2014 31 December 2017 2 Two-staged approach

Shortened infringement cycle Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Shortened infringement cycle Current Infringement Process (168 days) Fines Recovery model (77 days) Infringement Stage (112 days) Enforcement Stage (56 days) Warrant Stage (5 years) Infringement Notice 28 + 14 days Penalty Reminder Notice (PRN) 28 + 14 days Final reminder collection activities (up to 28 days) non-legislative Enforcement Order 28 + 14 days Infringement Warrant Issued Sheriff serves ‘7 day notice’ Sanctions are applied Notice of intension to issue warrant 28 days (non-legislative) Infringement Stage (49 days)   Enforcement Stage (28 days +)   Warrant Stage   Infringement Notice 21 + 7 days Penalty Reminder Notice (PRN) 14 + 7 days Notice of Final Demand 21 + 7 days Administrative sanctions can be applied Enforcement Warrant Issued   Sheriff serves ‘7 day notice’   Sheriff sanctions  

Internal review reforms Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Internal review reforms Internal review reforms

Internal review reforms Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Internal review reforms Changes commence 1 July 2017 A way for people to test the lawfulness and fairness of an enforcement agency’s decision to issue an infringement notice Help to ensure that applications are processed expeditiously and decisions are transparent and independent

Internal review reforms Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Internal review reforms New ground of person unaware New ground of family violence Matters no longer ‘default to court’ if an infringement is confirmed The Director, Fines Victoria, will develop guidelines for enforcement agencies and have oversight of their processes

Internal review grounds Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Internal review grounds A person can apply for internal review on the grounds of: contrary to law mistake of identity special circumstances exceptional circumstances person unaware incl. family violence new New ground

Internal review: person unaware Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Internal review: person unaware Person was unaware the infringement notice was served The notice was not personally served Apply within 14 days of becoming aware Update address within 14 days of changing address Note thresholds for person unaware must be met to establish the ground of person unaware

Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Enforcement Review

Enforcement Review Commences 31 December 2017 Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Enforcement Review Commences 31 December 2017 Replaces the current revocation scheme A person with a registered fine can apply to the Director to review the decision to enforce the fine The Director decides whether to confirm the fine or cancel enforcement Aim is to reduce the number of matters referred unnecessarily to the Magistrates’ Court – this will reduce both the administrative and hearing workload of the court. Outline specific grounds for review Brings it in line with internal review Same grounds as enforcement agency internal review PLUS the new ground of ‘person unaware’ Only one application is allowed - except for special circumstances, for which two applications are allowed

Enforcement review grounds Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Enforcement review grounds A person can apply for enforcement review on the grounds of: contrary to law mistake of identity special circumstances exceptional circumstances person unaware incl. family violence new New ground

Enforcement review outcomes Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Enforcement review outcomes The Director reviews the decision to serve the infringement to decide whether enforcement should proceed The Director can: Confirm the infringement The applicant has 21 days to deal with the fine Cancel enforcement The enforcement agency must withdraw the fine within 90 days and exercise an option in section 38(1) Currently, the Infringements Act provides that an infringements registrar may grant or refuse a revocation application. Infringement confirmation Where the Director confirms the decision to serve and enforce an infringement notice, the Director must notify the applicant within 21 days of making the enforcement review decision (s37(2)(a)). An applicant served with notice of infringement confirmation must pay the registered infringement fine or apply for a payment arrangement within 21 days of service (s40). If the applicant does nothing, the registered infringement fine will proceed through the enforcement lifecycle.   Enforcement cancellation Where the Director cancels enforcement of an infringement notice, the Director must notify the applicant and enforcement agency within 21 days of making the enforcement review decision (s37(2)). Enforcement agencies – options where Director cancels fine – section 38(1) Withdraw the fine and take no further action Withdraw the fine and issue an official warning Withdraw the fine and commence proceedings by way of charge and summons Commence proceedings within 90 days = file a charge sheet with a registrar of the Magistrates’ Court (not to have matter listed and/or heard) If the Director cancels enforcement in relation to an enforcement review application made on the ground of person unaware, registration of the relevant infringement fine is cancelled and the matter referred back to the enforcement agency to deal with in accordance with the Infringements Act. The matter is returned to infringements stage and all the person’s rights are restored. Where the enforcement agency decides to reissue the infringement notice to the same person, he/she can then exercise any rights including applying for internal review or nominating under Part 6AA of the Road Safety Act 1986 in the case of traffic and parking infringements.

Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served scheme

Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served scheme Allows a prisoner to be released from prison with a ‘clean slate’, with respect to infringement fine debt Replaces the existing Sheriff prison program The Sheriff / Director can apply to the Magistrates’ Court on behalf of a prisoner for an order to convert infringement fines into prison time

Time served scheme Key dates 1 July 2017 improvements to the scheme Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served scheme 1 July 2017 improvements to the scheme only applies to fines under infringement warrants operates under the Sheriff Key dates 31 December 2017 further improvements to the scheme expanded to include registered infringement fines operates under the Director, Fines Victoria The purpose of the ‘Time Served’ Scheme is to enable many prisoners to be released from prison with a ‘clean slate’ with respect to infringement fine debt, supporting rehabilitation and reintegration into the community post release, and reducing the possibility of re-imprisonment for fine-related debt Time may be served concurrently with, or cumulatively on, the prisoner’s existing sentence 1 penalty unit per day (approx. $155 per day)

Time served scheme: improvements Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served scheme: improvements Time is counted from the date the prisoner entered custody, including time spent on remand The court can hear an application after the prisoner is released, provided that the application was made while the prisoner was in custody Key improvements introduced by the ‘Time Served’ Scheme include: Counting ‘time served’ from the date the prisoner entered custody, including time spent on remand (rather than the date the prisoner requested the Sheriff make an application on their behalf). Allowing the Magistrates’ Court to hear the application after the prisoner is released, provided the application was made while the prisoner was in custody. Providing magistrates with additional orders to deal with any additional prison time, where the prisoner is serving a fine related sentence or the converted value of the prisoner’s registered infringement fines is greater than their existing non-fine related sentence (ie. the prisoner has ‘excess’ infringement fines). Additional orders include: discharging the ‘excess’ fines in full or part, making a time to pay or instalment order, adjourning for up to six months or ordering a term of imprisonment (noting that imprisonment must be a sanction of last resort).

Time served scheme: improvements Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served scheme: improvements Magistrates have additional orders in circumstances when the prisoner has ‘excess’ infringement fines Discharge excess fines in full or part Make a time to pay or instalment order Adjournment for up to six months Order a term of imprisonment (sanction of last resort) Key improvements introduced by the ‘Time Served’ Scheme include: Counting ‘time served’ from the date the prisoner entered custody, including time spent on remand (rather than the date the prisoner requested the Sheriff make an application on their behalf). Allowing the Magistrates’ Court to hear the application after the prisoner is released, provided the application was made while the prisoner was in custody. Providing magistrates with additional orders to deal with any additional prison time, where the prisoner is serving a fine related sentence or the converted value of the prisoner’s registered infringement fines is greater than their existing non-fine related sentence (ie. the prisoner has ‘excess’ infringement fines). Additional orders include: discharging the ‘excess’ fines in full or part, making a time to pay or instalment order, adjourning for up to six months or ordering a term of imprisonment (noting that imprisonment must be a sanction of last resort).

Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Time served: example Prisoner receipted into custody 1 March 2017 (remand) Prisoner is sentenced, release date 31 July 2017 earliest release date 30 June 2017 (parole date) Has 20 infringement warrants totalling $6,235.00 which converts to 40 days imprisonment ($6,235.00 divided by $158.57) 1 May 2017 prisoner requests the Director apply to the Magistrates' Court for an order to convert their infringement fines into prison time Hearing date 30 May 2017 Magistrate makes a Time Served order converting the prisoner’s 20 infringement warrants to time already served

Changes to Sentencing Act Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Changes to Sentencing Act Harmonisation of court powers

Consistent approach to default Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Consistent approach to default Harmonisation’ of court powers on default Aligns the sentencing powers available to a court for infringement fine default with those available for court fine default under the Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic).

Key changes ‘Harmonisation’ reforms will: Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Key changes ‘Harmonisation’ reforms will: make imprisonment a sanction of last resort for infringement fine default provide that a magistrate must not make an imprisonment order if satisfied the person did not have capacity to pay or had another reasonable excuse for non-payment provide for a maximum term of imprisonment of 24 months for infringement fine default. Reason for reforms - sentencing anomaly identified by Sentencing Advisory Council – orders available to a court on fine default contingent on fine type rather than offending conduct. Results in court fine defaulter at far less risk of imprisonment than infringement fine defaulter. Amendments provide for a consistent set of orders for dealing with fine defaulters, regardless of the type of fine.

Questions fines-reform@justice.vic.gov.au Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Questions fines-reform@justice.vic.gov.au Dale Looking forward to continuing to work with stakeholders to implement these reforms Real benefits more efficient system, easier to understand and deal with deliver social justice initiatives better recognise people’s circumstances assist vulnerable people Excited to be delivering these reforms. Questions (answer what we can, take on notice) Contact us

Contact us: fines-reform@justice.vic.gov.au Infringement Management and Enforcement Services Contact us: fines-reform@justice.vic.gov.au Dale