32
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 23, 1986
MEMBERS CONSIDERED THAT THE BETTER COURSE WAS TO RETAIN THE PRESENT STATUTORY TIME LIMIT AND TO DEPLOY SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO MEET IT, DR IP SAID.
+ IF IT PROVES TO BE THE CASE THAT EXISTING STAFFING LEVELS ARE CLEARLY INADEQUATE TO MAKE THE LEGISLATION EFFECTIVE, THEN THE ADMINISTRATION WILL NO DOUBT CONSIDER RECOMMENDING AN INCREASE IN EXPENDITURE IN ORDER TO MAKE THE LEGISLATION WORK, AND IF SO, MEMBERS WILL SUPPORT THE RECOMMENDATION.
+FOR THE MOMENT, HOWEVER, IT IS THE VIEW OF THE AD HOC GROUP THAT THE PRINCIPLE OF SPEEDY ACCESS TO SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNALS MUST NOT BE ERODED - AND IT IS ON THIS BASIS THAT I SHALL BE MOVING AN AMENDMENT IN COMMITTEE TO RETAIN THE PRESENT LIMIT OF 60 DAYS, SHE SAID.
DR IP ALSO MENTIONED THAT ANOTHER PROVISION OF THE BILL SEEKING TO INCREASE THE MONETARY JURISDICTION OF THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL FROM $5 000 TO $8 000 WAS UNANIMOUSLY SUPPORTED BY UNOFFICIAL MEMBERS.
THANKING DR IP AND MEMBERS OF THE AD HOC GROUP FOR THEIR TIME, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, THE HON MICHAEL THOMAS, SAID HE RECOGNISED THAT THE PROBLEM OF MEETING THE IRREGULAR FLOW OF WORK IN THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL COULD BE OVERCOME IN MORE WAYS THAN THE ONE PROPOSED BY THE AMENDMENT BILL.
+ THE FURTHER ENQUIRIES MADE BY THE AD HOC GROUP OF THE REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT HAVE SHOWN THAT THE EXISTING TIME LIMIT CAN BE MET IF ADDITIONAL RESOURCES ARE MADE AVAILABLE,+ HE SAID.
MR THOMAS SAID THAT HE UNDERSTOOD THAT THE REGISTRAR OF THE SUPREME COURT HAD BEGUN TO EXAMINE THE PRESENT STAFFING LEVELS OF THE SMALL CLAIMS TRIBUNAL SO AS TO ASSESS THE ADDITIONAL RESOURCES TO BE NEEDED TO ENABLE ALL CLAIM TO BE HEARD WITHIN 60 DAYS.
THE GOVERNMENT, HE ADDED, WOULD SUPPORT THE AMENDMENTS TO BE MOVED BY DR IP IN THE LIGHT OF HER ASSURANCE THAT MEMBERS OF THIS COUNCIL WILL SUPPORT ANY INCREASE IN PUBLIC EXPENDITURE THAT MAY BE REQUIRED IF PRESENT TIME LIMIT IS TO BE RETAINED.+
/33