{"id":"courts-case-transfer-act-1991","name":"Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991","slug":"courts-case-transfer-act-1991","collection":"act","jurisdiction":"vic","status":"in_force","isInForce":true,"actNumber":null,"makingDate":null,"administeringDepartment":null,"currentVersion":{"id":176250,"registerId":"vic-courts-case-transfer-act-1991-current","compilationNumber":null,"startDate":"2026-04-05","status":"InForce","reasons":null,"registeredAt":null},"sections":[{"sectionNumber":"1","sectionType":"section","heading":"Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991","content":"Version No. 006\n\n**Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991**\n\n**No. 43 of 1991**\n\nVersion incorporating amendments as at  \n1 May 2018\n\n**table of provisions**\n\n*Section Page*\n\nPart 1—Preliminary 1\n\n1 Purposes 1\n\n2 Commencement 1\n\n3 Definitions 2\n\n4 Delegation 3\n\n5 Nature of transfers under this Act 3\n\nPart 2—General transfers 4\n\n6 When general transfer may take place 4\n\n7 Registry officer to identify suitable proceedings 4\n\n8 Designated judicial officers to select proceedings from those identified 5\n\n9 Parties to be notified 5\n\n10 Parties may object 5\n\n11 Senior judicial officers to consider objections 6\n\n12 Transfer order 6\n\n13 Conduct of proceeding after transfer 7\n\n14 Only one transfer possible 8\n\nPart 3—Individual transfers 9\n\n15 When individual transfer may take place 9\n\n16 Criteria for transfer 9\n\n17 Reference to designated judicial officers 9\n\n18 Parties to be notified 11\n\n19 Parties may object 11\n\n20 Senior judicial officers to consider objections 11\n\n21 Transfer order 12\n\n22 Conduct of proceeding after transfer 12\n\n23 Only one transfer possible 14\n\nPart 4—Circuit transfers 15\n\n24 Circuit transfers 15\n\n25 More than one transfer possible 15\n\nPart 5—Administrative transfers 16\n\n26 Certification by plaintiff that proceeding within lower court's jurisdiction 16\n\n27 Certification by defendant that counterclaim exceeds court's jurisdiction 16\n\n28 Consequences of order under this Part 17\n\n29 More than one transfer possible 17\n\nPart 6—Other transfers 18\n\n30 Other transfers 18\n\n31 Consequences of order under this Part 18\n\n32 This Part additional to other Parts 19\n\n33 Only further transfer under Part 4 possible 19\n\nPart 7—Case transfer rules 20\n\n34 Power to make case transfer rules 20\n\n35 Rules prevail over inconsistent rules of court 20\n\nEndnotes 22\n\n1 General information 22\n\n2 Table of Amendments 24\n\n3 Amendments Not in Operation 25\n\n4 Explanatory details 26\n\n**Version No.** **006**\n\n**Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991**\n\n**No. 43 of 1991**\n\nVersion incorporating amendments as at  \n1 May 2018\n\n**The Parliament of Victoria enacts as follows:**\n\nPart 1—Preliminary\n\n\t1 Purposes\n\nThe purposes of this Act are—\n\n(a) to establish a new system for the transfer of civil proceedings between courts in order to improve efficiency in the administration of civil justice in Victoria;\n\n(b) to alter the jurisdictional limits of the County Court in civil proceedings;\n\n(c) to provide for the suspension of the pension entitlements of a Reserve Supreme Court or County Court Judge while he or she holds another public office or engages in legal practice anywhere in Australia and to require such a Judge to obtain the consent of the Chief Justice or Chief Judge (as the case requires) before accepting such an appointment.\n\n\t2 Commencement\n\nThis Act comes into operation on a day or days to be proclaimed.\n\n\t3 Definitions\n\n(1) In this Act—\n\n***case transfer rules*** means rules made under Part 7;\n\n***circuit court*** means the Supreme Court or County Court sitting at a place outside Melbourne;\n\n***court*** means the Supreme Court, County Court or Magistrates' Court;\n\nS. 3(1) def. of *Designated judicial officer* amended by No. 24/2008 s. 76, substituted as *designated judicial officer* by No. 38/2017 s. 65.\n\n***designated judicial officer***—\n\n(a) in relation to the Supreme Court, means an Associate Judge or a judicial registrar of the Supreme Court designated by the Chief Justice for the purposes of this  \nAct;\n\n(b) in relation to the County Court, means a judge, an associate judge or a judicial registrar of the County Court designated by the Chief Judge for the purposes of this Act;\n\n(c) in relation to the Magistrates' Court, means a magistrate or a judicial registrar of the Magistrates' Court designated by the Chief Magistrate for the purposes of this Act;\n\n***proceeding*** means civil proceeding;\n\n***senior judicial officer***—\n\n(a) in relation to the Supreme Court, means the Chief Justice;\n\n(b) in relation to the County Court, means the Chief Judge;\n\n(c) in relation to the Magistrates' Court, means the Chief Magistrate.\n\n(2) For the purposes of this Act a court only has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine a proceeding if it is wholly or partly of a type that neither of the other courts has jurisdiction to hear and determine, whatever amount or value is either claimed or involved.\n\n\t4 Delegation\n\n(1) The senior judicial officer of a court may delegate to another judicial officer of that court any of his or her powers or duties under this Act, other than the power to make agreements under section 6 or 24(1), the power to make case transfer rules and this power of delegation.\n\n(2) The Council of Judges or magistrates (as the case requires) of a court may delegate to a committee of the Council any of its powers under this Act, other than the power to approve the making of case transfer rules and this power of delegation.\n\n\t5 Nature of transfers under this Act\n\nA proceeding may be transferred under this Act—\n\n(a) by an order of the court in which it is pending that applies to that proceeding alone (an individual transfer or a transfer under Part 6) or to a number of proceedings of which it is one (a general transfer); or\n\n(b) by an order of the circuit court in which it is pending that applies to that proceeding alone or to a number of proceedings of which it is one (a circuit transfer); or\n\n(c) by an order of an officer of the court in which it is pending that applies to that proceeding alone (an administrative transfer).\n\nPart 2—General transfers\n\n\t6 When general transfer may take place\n\n(1) A general transfer of proceedings from one court to another may take place if the senior judicial officers of those courts agree that one court is overloaded with pending proceedings relative to the other court and that there should be a transfer of an agreed number of proceedings.\n\n(2) An agreement under subsection (1) is of no effect unless it has the approval of the Council of Judges or magistrates (as the case requires) of both courts.\n\n(3) An approval under subsection (2) may be given before or after the making of the agreement.\n\n\t7 Registry officer to identify suitable proceedings\n\n(1) Following the making and approval of an agreement under section 6 the senior judicial officer of the overloaded court may direct an officer employed in the registry of that court to identify a specified number of proceedings that may be suitable for transfer.\n\n(2) In identifying proceedings for transfer the registry officer must have regard to any guidelines issued by the senior judicial officer of that court.\n\n(3) After having identified the required number of proceedings the registry officer must deliver to the designated judicial officer of that court the documents filed in the court in each of those proceedings and a summary of the file of each proceeding.\n\n\t8 Designated judicial officers to select proceedings from those identified\n\n(1) The designated judicial officers of the two courts concerned must consider the identified proceedings and determine which of them should be transferred.\n\n(2) A proceeding may only be transferred under this Part if in the opinion of the designated judicial officers—\n\n(a) the transferor court does not have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine it; and\n\n(b) the transferee court has the appropriate skill, experience and authority to hear and determine it having regard to its gravity, difficulty and importance; and\n\n(c) it is just and convenient that it be transferred.\n\n(3) A proceeding must not be transferred to the Magistrates' Court if a party has elected, or the court in which it is pending has ordered, that it be heard and determined with a jury.\n\n(4) If the designated judicial officers cannot agree about whether a particular proceeding should be transferred or not, the opinion of the officer of the higher court is to be taken to be the determination of both.\n\n\t9 Parties to be notified\n\nThe transferor court must cause the parties to the proceedings selected for transfer to be notified of that fact.\n\n\t10 Parties may object\n\nA party to a proceeding selected for transfer may, within the period specified in the case transfer rules, file in the transferor court a notice of objection to the transfer.\n\n\t11 Senior judicial officers to consider objections\n\n(1) The senior judicial officers of the two courts concerned must consider any objections filed and may permit any objecting party to make oral submissions to them in support of the objection.\n\n(2) After having considered an objection and any oral submission permitted to be made in support of it the senior judicial officers must determine whether the proceeding should be transferred.\n\n(3) If the senior judicial officers cannot agree, the opinion of the officer of the higher court is to be taken to be the determination of both.\n\n\t12 Transfer order\n\n(1) The transferor court (constituted by its designated judicial officer) must, as soon as practicable, make an order transferring to the transferee court—\n\n(a) all proceedings selected for transfer by the designated judicial officers and in respect of which no objection was filed; and\n\n(b) all proceedings that the senior judicial officers determined should be transferred following the filing of an objection.\n\n(2) If an order is made under this section—\n\n(a) all proceedings to which the order applies are discontinued in the transferor court; and\n\n(b) the transferor court must cause the record and all documents relating to those proceedings to be sent to the transferee court.\n\n(3) An appeal does not lie from an order made under this section.\n\n\t13 Conduct of proceeding after transfer\n\n(1) The following apply to a proceeding transferred under this Part—\n\n(a) the transferee court (if it is a lower court than the transferor court) has power to grant in the proceeding any relief, redress or remedy and to make any order that the transferor court would have had power to grant or make if the proceeding had not been transferred;\n\n(b) the proceeding is subject to the procedural rules and practices of the transferee court;\n\n(c) unless the transferee court otherwise orders, anything done or omitted to be done in the proceeding under or in accordance with the rules of court that applied to it before the transfer must be taken, so far as possible, to have been done or omitted under the rules that apply in the transferee court;\n\n(d) the transferee court must endeavour to ensure that the proceeding is heard and determined no later than it would have been if it had not been transferred;\n\n(e) a judgment given or order made by the transferee court in the proceeding has effect and may be enforced or appealed against like any other judgment or order of that court;\n\n(f) if the transferee court orders that costs be paid to a party in respect of the conduct of the proceeding in the transferor court in the period before the transfer, that party shall, unless the transferee court otherwise orders, be entitled to costs in respect of that period on the transferor court scale;\n\n(g) if the transferee court orders that costs be paid to a party in respect of the conduct of the proceeding in the transferee court in the period after the transfer, that party shall, unless the transferee court otherwise orders or the party has otherwise elected in accordance with the case transfer rules, be entitled to costs in respect of that period on the transferor court scale.\n\n(2) Subsection (1)(a) applies even if the transferor court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceeding.\n\n\t14 Only one transfer possible\n\nA proceeding that has been transferred to a court under this Part or Part 3 is not capable of being transferred under this Part, whether to the original transferor court or to the other court.\n\nPart 3—Individual transfers\n\n\t15 When individual transfer may take place\n\nA proceeding may be individually transferred from one court to another under this Part if the court in which it is pending so orders under section 21 after it has been referred under section 17 to the designated judicial officers of the two courts concerned.\n\n\t16 Criteria for transfer\n\n(1) A proceeding may only be transferred under this Part if in the opinion of the designated judicial officers—\n\n(a) the transferor court does not have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine it; and\n\n(b) the transferee court has the appropriate skill, experience and authority to hear and determine it having regard to its gravity, difficulty and importance; and\n\n(c) it is just and convenient that it be transferred.\n\n(2) A proceeding must not be transferred to the Magistrates' Court if a party has elected, or the court in which it is pending has ordered, that it be heard and determined with a jury.\n\n\t17 Reference to designated judicial officers\n\n(1) A judicial or administrative officer of the court in which a proceeding is pending (including the designated judicial officer of that court), or a party to a proceeding, who is of the opinion that the proceeding is or may be suitable for transfer to another court under this Part may refer the matter to the designated judicial officer of the court in which it is pending.\n\n(2) That designated judicial officer must, in accordance with the case transfer rules, give the parties to the proceeding a reasonable opportunity to make written submissions on the matter.\n\n(3) That designated judicial officer and his or her counterpart in the possible transferee court must consider the proceeding and any written submissions made in respect of it and determine whether it should be transferred.\n\n(4) The designated judicial officers may adjourn their consideration of a proceeding—\n\n(a) to such times and places; and\n\n(b) for such purposes—\n\nas they consider necessary or just in the circumstances.\n\n(5) If the designated judicial officers cannot agree about whether a particular proceeding should be transferred or not, the opinion of the officer of the higher court is to be taken to be the determination of both.\n\n(6) The designated judicial officers may require an undertaking as to costs to be given by—\n\n(a) a party who supports the transfer as a condition of determining that a proceeding should be transferred; or\n\n(b) a party who opposes the transfer as a condition of determining that a proceeding should not be transferred.\n\n(7) The designated judicial officers must not require an undertaking from a party without giving the party a reasonable opportunity to be heard by them.\n\n(8) A step or further step must not be taken under this section with respect to a proceeding if the court in which it is pending (constituted by a judge or magistrate, as the case requires) has by order declared that it is not in the interests of justice that the proceeding be transferred having regard to the stage to which it has progressed.\n\n\t18 Parties to be notified\n\nIf it is determined that a proceeding should be transferred, the transferor court must cause the parties to be notified of that fact.\n\n\t19 Parties may object\n\nA party to a proceeding may, within the period specified in the case transfer rules, file in the transferor court a notice of objection to the transfer.\n\n\t20 Senior judicial officers to consider objections\n\n(1) The senior judicial officers of the two courts concerned must consider any objections filed and may permit any objecting party to make oral submissions to them in support of the objection.\n\n(2) After having considered an objection and any oral submission permitted to be made in support of it the senior judicial officers must determine whether the proceeding should be transferred.\n\n(3) If the senior judicial officers cannot agree, the opinion of the officer of the higher court is to be taken to be the determination of both.\n\n(4) The senior judicial officers may require an undertaking as to costs to be given by—\n\n(a) a party who supports the transfer as a condition of determining that a proceeding should be transferred; or\n\n(b) a party who opposes the transfer as a condition of determining that a proceeding should not be transferred.\n\n(5) The senior judicial officers must not require an undertaking from a party without giving the party a reasonable opportunity to be heard by them.\n\n\t21 Transfer order\n\n(1) If no objection is filed or the senior judicial officers determine that a proceeding should be transferred following the filing of an objection, the transferor court (constituted by its designated judicial officer) must, as soon as practicable, make an order transferring the proceeding to the transferee court.\n\n(2) If an order is made under this section—\n\n(a) the proceeding is discontinued in the transferor court; and\n\n(b) the transferor court must cause the record and all documents relating to the proceeding to be sent to the transferee court.\n\n(3) An appeal does not lie from an order made under this section.\n\n\t22 Conduct of proceeding after transfer\n\n(1) The following apply to a proceeding transferred under this Part—\n\n(a) the transferee court (if it is a lower court than the transferor court) has power to grant in the proceeding any relief, redress or remedy and to make any order that the transferor court would have had power to grant or make if the proceeding had not been transferred;\n\n(b) the proceeding is subject to the procedural rules and practices of the transferee court;\n\n(c) unless the transferee court otherwise orders, anything done or omitted to be done in the proceeding under or in accordance with the rules of court that applied to it before the transfer must be taken, so far as possible, to have been done or omitted under the rules that apply in the transferee court;\n\n(d) the transferee court must endeavour to ensure that the proceeding is heard and determined no later than it would have been if it had not been transferred;\n\n(e) a judgment given or order made by the transferee court in the proceeding has effect and may be enforced or appealed against like any other judgment or order of that court;\n\n(f) if the transferee court orders that costs be paid to a party in respect of the conduct of the proceeding in the transferor court in the period before the transfer, that party shall, unless the transferee court otherwise orders, be entitled to costs in respect of that period on the transferor court scale;\n\n(g) if the transferee court orders that costs be paid to a party in respect of the conduct of the proceeding in the transferee court in the period after the transfer, that party shall, unless the transferee court otherwise orders or an undertaking required to be given by a party as a condition of the transfer otherwise provides, be entitled to costs in respect of that period on the transferee court scale.\n\n(2) Subsection (1)(a) applies even if the transferor court has exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceeding.\n\n\t23 Only one transfer possible\n\nA proceeding that has been transferred to a court under this Part or Part 2 is not capable of being transferred under this Part, whether to the original transferor court or to the other court.\n\nPart 4—Circuit transfers\n\n\t24 Circuit transfers\n\n(1) A transfer from one circuit court to another of one or more than one pending proceeding may take place if the senior judicial officers of those courts agree that one court has the capacity to deal with it or them and in the particular circumstances it is not convenient for the procedure set out in Part 2 or 3 to be followed.\n\n(2) A proceeding may only be transferred under this Part if—\n\n(a) in the opinion of the senior judicial officers the criteria set out in section 8(2) are met; and\n\n(b) the parties to the proceeding consent.\n\n(3) The transferor court (constituted by its designated judicial officer) must, as soon as practicable, make an order transferring to the transferee court all proceedings that, under subsections (1) and (2), are capable of being transferred.\n\n(4) Sections 12(2) and (3) and 13 apply to a proceeding transferred under this Part in the same manner as they apply to a proceeding transferred under Part 2.\n\n\t25 More than one transfer possible\n\nA proceeding that has been transferred to a court under this Part is capable of being again transferred under this Part or under Part 2, 3 or 6.\n\nPart 5—Administrative transfers\n\n\t26 Certification by plaintiff that proceeding within lower court's jurisdiction\n\n(1) The plaintiff to a proceeding in the Supreme Court or the County Court may apply to the Prothonotary of the Supreme Court or the registrar of the County Court (as the case requires) for an order that the proceeding be transferred to a lower court if the plaintiff certifies in accordance with the case transfer rules that the lower court has, or with the written consent of the parties will have, jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceeding, including any counterclaim.\n\n(2) The Prothonotary or registrar must grant an application under subsection (1) and make an appropriate order if satisfied—\n\n(a) that the lower court has, or (by consent of the parties) will have, jurisdiction; and\n\n(b) that the requirements (if any) of the case transfer rules are met.\n\n\t27 Certification by defendant that counterclaim exceeds court's jurisdiction\n\n(1) The defendant to a proceeding in the County Court or the Magistrates' Court may apply to the registrar of the County Court or the principal registrar of the Magistrates' Court (as the case requires) for an order that the proceeding be transferred to a higher court if the defendant certifies in accordance with the case transfer rules that a counterclaim involves a matter exceeding the jurisdiction of the court and that the plaintiff does not consent to the court having jurisdiction.\n\n(2) The registrar or principal registrar must grant an application under subsection (1) and make an appropriate order if satisfied that the requirements (if any) of the case transfer rules are met.\n\n\t28 Consequences of order under this Part\n\nSections 21(2) and (3) and 22 (except subsection (1)(d)) apply to a proceeding transferred under this Part in the same manner as they apply to a proceeding transferred under Part 3.\n\n\t29 More than one transfer possible\n\nA proceeding that has been transferred to a court under this Part is not capable of being again transferred under this Part or Part 2 but is capable of being transferred under Part 3, 4 or 6.\n\nPart 6—Other transfers\n\n\t30 Other transfers\n\nS. 30(1) amended by No. 38/2017 s. 66.\n\n(1) The Supreme Court or the County Court may, of its own motion or on the application of a party to a proceeding pending in that court, order that the proceeding be transferred to a lower court.\n\n(2) An order may only be made by a court under subsection (1) if it is satisfied—\n\n(a) that it does not have exclusive jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceeding; and\n\n(b) that—\n\n(i) the lower court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the proceeding; or\n\n(ii) the parties consent to the transfer; and\n\n(c) that in all the circumstances it is desirable to make the order.\n\n\t31 Consequences of order under this Part\n\nThe following provisions of this Act apply to a proceeding transferred under this Part in the same manner as they apply to a proceeding transferred under Part 3—\n\n(a) section 21(2);\n\n(b) section 22(1)(b), (c), (e) and (f);\n\n(c) section 22(1)(g) with the omission of the expression \"or an undertaking required to be given by a party as a condition of the transfer otherwise provides\".\n\n\t32 This Part additional to other Parts\n\nThe provisions of this Part are additional to, and do not limit the operation of, the other provisions of this Act.\n\n\t33 Only further transfer under Part 4 possible\n\nA proceeding that has been transferred to a court under this Part is not capable of being again transferred under any other Part of this Act except Part 4.\n\nPart 7—Case transfer rules\n\n\t34 Power to make case transfer rules\n\n(1) The Chief Justice, the Chief Judge and the Chief Magistrate (with the approval of the Council of Judges or magistrates, as the case requires) may jointly make rules for or with respect to the transfer of proceedings under this Act.\n\n(2) Rules made under this Act may be made so as to apply—\n\n(a) to all three courts generally; or\n\n(b) to any specified court; or\n\n(c) to any specified court sitting at any specified place or places.\n\nS. 34(3) substituted by No. 78/2010 s. 24(Sch. 1 item 9).\n\n(3) Rules may be disallowed in whole or in part by resolution of either House of the Parliament in accordance with the **Subordinate Legislation Act 1994**.\n\n(4) Disallowance under subsection (3) is deemed to be disallowance by Parliament for the purposes of the **Subordinate Legislation Act 1962**.\n\n\t35 Rules prevail over inconsistent rules of court\n\nAny rule of court that applies to a court or to a proceeding in a court is of no effect to the extent that it is inconsistent with the case transfer rules.\n\nPts 8, 9 (Headings and ss 36–41) repealed by No. 70/2013 s. 3(Sch. 1 item 11).\n\n* * * * *\n\n\n\nEndnotes\n\n1 General information\n\nSee [www.legislation.vic.gov.au](http://www.legislation.vic.gov.au) for Victorian Bills, Acts and current Versions of legislation and up-to-date legislative information.\n\n*Minister's second reading speech*—\n\n*Legislative Assembly: 21 March 1991*\n\n*Legislative Council: 30 May 1991*\n\nThe long title for the Bill for this Act was (as amended) \"A Bill to establish a new system for the transfer of civil proceedings between courts and for that purpose to amend the **Supreme Court Act 1986**, the **County Court Act 1958** and the **Magistrates' Court Act 1989**, to alter the jurisdictional limits of the County Court in civil proceedings, to make further provision concerning the office of Reserve Judge in the Supreme Court and the County Court and for that purpose to amend the **Constitution Act 1975** and the **County Court Act 1958** and for other purposes.\".\n\nThe **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** was assented to on 18 June 1991 and came into operation as follows:\n\nSection 2 and sections 39–41 on 1 August 1991; rest of Act on 1 October 1991: Government Gazette 17 July 1991 p. 1930.\n\nINTERPRETATION OF LEGISLATION ACT 1984 (ILA)\n\nStyle changes\n\nSection 54A of the ILA authorises the making of the style changes set out in Schedule 1 to that Act.\n\nReferences to ILA s. 39B\n\nSidenotes which cite ILA s. 39B refer to section 39B of the ILA which provides that where an undivided section or clause of a Schedule is amended by the insertion of one or more subsections or subclauses, the original section or clause becomes subsection or subclause (1) and is amended by the insertion of the expression \"(1)\" at the beginning of the original section or clause.\n\nInterpretation\n\nAs from 1 January 2001, amendments to section 36 of the ILA have the following effects:\n\n• Headings\n\nAll headings included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 form part of that Act. Any heading inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, forms part of that Act. This includes headings to Parts, Divisions or Subdivisions in a Schedule; sections; clauses; items; tables; columns; examples; diagrams; notes or forms. See section 36(1A)(2A).\n\n• Examples, diagrams or notes\n\nAll examples, diagrams or notes included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 form part of that Act. Any examples, diagrams or notes inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, form part of that Act. See section 36(3A).\n\n• Punctuation\n\nAll punctuation included in an Act which is passed on or after 1 January 2001 forms part of that Act. Any punctuation inserted in an Act which was passed before 1 January 2001, by an Act passed on or after 1 January 2001, forms part of that Act. See section 36(3B).\n\n• Provision numbers\n\nAll provision numbers included in an Act form part of that Act, whether inserted in the Act before, on or after 1 January 2001. Provision numbers include section numbers, subsection numbers, paragraphs and subparagraphs. See section 36(3C).\n\n• Location of \"legislative items\"\n\nA \"legislative item\" is a penalty, an example or a note. As from 13 October 2004, a legislative item relating to a provision of an Act is taken to be at the foot of that provision even if it is preceded or followed by another legislative item that relates to that provision. For example, if a penalty at the foot of a provision is followed by a note, both of these legislative items will be regarded as being at the foot of that provision. See section 36B.\n\n• Other material\n\nAny explanatory memorandum, table of provisions, endnotes, index and other material printed after the Endnotes does not form part of an Act.  \nSee section 36(3)(3D)(3E).\n\n2 Table of Amendments\n\nThis publication incorporates amendments made to the **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** by Acts and subordinate instruments.\n\n–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––\n\n**Courts Legislation Amendment (Associate Judges) Act 2008, No. 24/2008**\n\n| Assent Date: | 3.6.08 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 76 on 17.12.08: Special Gazette (No. 377) 16.12.08 p. 1 |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** |\n\n\n**Subordinate Legislation Amendment Act 2010, No. 78/2010**\n\n| Assent Date: | 19.10.10 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 24(Sch. 1 item 9) on 1.1.11: s. 2(1) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** |\n\n\n**Statute Law Revision Act 2013, No. 70/2013**\n\n| Assent Date: | 19.11.13 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | S. 3(Sch. 1 item 11) on 1.12.13: s. 2(1) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** |\n\n\n**Justice Legislation Amendment (Court Security, Juries and Other Matters) Act 2017, No. 38/2017**\n\n| Assent Date: | 29.8.17 |\n| --- | --- |\n| Commencement Date: | Ss 65, 66 on 1.5.18: s. 2(4) |\n| Current State: | This information relates only to the provision/s amending the **Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991** |\n\n\n–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––\n\n3 Amendments Not in Operation\n\nThere are no amendments which were Not in Operation at the date of this publication.\n\n4 Explanatory details\n\nNo entries at date of publication.","sortOrder":0}],"analysis":{"flash_summary_failed":{"failed":true,"reason":"A positive credit balance is required for all requests, including BYOK, so fallback providers remain available. Add credits at https://vercel.com/d?to=%2F%5Bteam%5D%2F%7E%2Fai%3Fmodal%3Dtop-up to continue.","source":"analysis-cron"},"summary":{"complexity_score":3,"scope_assessment":{"changed":false,"description":"Insufficient legislative text was provided to assess whether the scope of the Act changed from its original intent. The document contains only version history and metadata rather than operative provisions. Based on the title alone, the Act appears to remain focused on its original purpose of enabling case transfers between courts."},"complexity_factors":["Insufficient legislative text provided — only metadata and version history were supplied, preventing analysis of actual operative provisions","Court transfer legislation typically involves jurisdictional concepts (which court has authority) that can confuse non-lawyers","Interaction with multiple court hierarchies (Magistrates, County, Supreme) adds moderate complexity","Procedural law (rules about how cases are run) is generally more technical than substantive law (rules about rights)","The 1991 vintage means there may be subsequent amendments not visible in this extract"],"plain_english_summary":"## Courts (Case Transfer) Act 1991\n\nThis Victorian law (Act No. 43/1991) establishes rules for **transferring legal cases between different courts**.\n\n### What does it do?\nIt creates a formal mechanism allowing cases to be moved from one court to another within the Victorian court system — for example, moving a matter from a lower court to a higher court, or vice versa, when that would be more appropriate or efficient.\n\n### Who does it affect?\n- **Litigants** (people involved in court cases) who may have their matter heard in a different court than originally filed\n- **Lawyers** who need to understand where and how to argue for a transfer\n- **Courts themselves**, which gain powers and obligations around accepting or rejecting transferred cases\n\n### Why does it matter?\nWithout a transfer mechanism, cases can end up in the wrong court — wasting time and money. This law helps ensure cases are dealt with by the most appropriate court, which can affect **costs, timelines, and the procedural rules** that apply to your case.\n\n### Limitations of this analysis\n⚠️ The document provided contains very limited legislative content — mostly metadata and version history. A full analysis of specific provisions, rights, and obligations is not possible from the text supplied."},"kimi_summary":{"content_quality":"ok","complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The legislation has shrunk from its original scope. The long title and section 1(c) indicate the Act originally dealt with Reserve Judge pensions and County Court jurisdictional limits, but Parts 8 and 9 (which presumably contained these provisions) were repealed in 2013. The current Act is now focused solely on case transfer mechanisms, making it narrower than originally enacted. Additionally, the 2017 amendments updated terminology (changing 'Master' to 'Associate Judge') showing maintenance evolution rather than expansion."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple overlapping transfer mechanisms (5 different Parts with different procedures, criteria, and consequences)","Extensive cross-referencing between Parts (e.g., sections 12, 13, 21, 22 applied by reference in later Parts with modifications)","Conditional logic regarding transfer limits—different Parts allow different numbers of subsequent transfers (compare sections 14, 23, 25, 29, 33)","Nested decision-making hierarchies involving registry officers, designated judicial officers, senior judicial officers, and Councils of Judges/magistrates","Multiple defined terms including 'designated judicial officer' with court-specific definitions (section 3)","Exceptions to general rules (e.g., section 13(2) preserves transferor court powers even when it has exclusive jurisdiction)","Amendment history embedded in text (e.g., 'S. 30(1) amended by No. 38/2017 s. 66') creating visual clutter","Repealed Parts (8 and 9) leaving gaps in numbering and historical context requiring explanation"],"plain_english_summary":"This Victorian law creates a system for moving civil court cases between Victoria's three main courts—the Supreme Court (highest), County Court (middle), and Magistrates' Court (lowest)—to help manage workloads and ensure cases are heard in the most appropriate forum.\n\n**What it does:**\nThe Act sets up five different ways to transfer cases:\n\n- **General transfers (Part 2):** When one court is overloaded, senior judges can agree to move a batch of cases to another court that has spare capacity. Registry staff identify suitable cases, designated judicial officers select which ones to move, and parties can object before a final decision is made.\n\n- **Individual transfers (Part 3):** A single case can be moved if judicial officers or parties believe it would be better handled in another court. The test is whether the receiving court has the right skills and authority for the case's complexity, and whether transfer is \"just and convenient.\"\n\n- **Circuit transfers (Part 4):** Cases can move between regional court locations (circuit courts) when one location has capacity and the usual transfer process would be inconvenient. Parties must consent to these transfers.\n\n- **Administrative transfers (Part 5):** Simple paperwork transfers handled by court registrars rather than judges. A plaintiff can move a case down to a lower court if they certify the lower court has jurisdiction. A defendant can move a case up if their counterclaim exceeds the current court's limits.\n\n- **Other transfers (Part 6):** The Supreme or County Court can voluntarily transfer a case down to a lower court if it considers this desirable.\n\n**Key protections:**\n- Cases generally can only be transferred once (with limited exceptions for circuit transfers)\n- Parties receive notice and can object to transfers\n- When a case moves to a lower court, that court keeps the power to grant the same remedies the higher court could have granted\n- Costs are usually calculated based on the scale of the court where the work was actually done\n\n**Who it affects:**\nLitigants in Victorian civil proceedings, lawyers, and court administrators. The Act aims to reduce delays by balancing workloads across courts and ensuring complex cases go to courts with appropriate expertise, while simpler cases can be handled more cheaply in lower courts.\n\n**Odd historical note:**\nThe Act's original purposes also included altering County Court jurisdictional limits and suspending pension entitlements for Reserve Judges who took other public offices—provisions that appear to have been removed or spent over time (Parts 8 and 9 were repealed in 2013)."},"flash_summary":{"complexity_score":6,"scope_assessment":{"changed":true,"description":"The core purpose of creating a system for transferring civil proceedings remains, but the statutory scope and wording have been altered by later amendments recorded in the Act’s endnotes and table of amendments. The definition of designated judicial officer has been amended (see note to s 3(1)), specific subsections of s 34 were substituted (see note to s 34(3)), and Parts 8 and 9 (headings and ss 36–41) were repealed (see table of amendments referring to No. 24/2008, No. 78/2010 and No. 70/2013). Those changes adjust roles, definitions and the rule‑making framework without removing the Act’s central transfer mechanisms (see s 5–35)."},"complexity_factors":["Multiple distinct transfer routes (general, individual, circuit, administrative, other) with different initiation and consent rules (s 5, s 6, s 15, s 24, s 26, s 30).","Multiple decision‑makers at different stages: registry officers, designated judicial officers, senior judicial officers, registrars and court leadership (s 7, s 8, s 11, s 17, s 20, s 26).","Objection windows and procedural timing are delegated to case transfer rules, creating dependence on secondary instruments (s 10, s 19, s 34).","Costs consequences differ pre‑ and post‑transfer and courts may require undertakings, adding financial complexity (s 13(1)(f)–(g); s 22(1)(f)–(g); s 17(6); s 20(4)).","Certain transfer orders are non‑appealable, concentrating stakes on initial decision points and increasing importance of procedural safeguards (s 12(3); s 21(3)).","Delegation rules and reserved powers create layered discretion (s 4), while rule‑making and parliamentary disallowance add an external oversight layer (s 34(1), (3)).","Interplay with exclusive jurisdiction rules and jury election limits requires legal assessment of jurisdictional facts (s 3(2); s 8(3); s 16(2)).","Ancillary provisions (e.g. transmission of records, continuity of steps taken previously, and limits on repeated transfers) create operational detail parties and registries must follow (s 12(2)(b); s 13(1)(c); s 14; s 23; s 29)."],"plain_english_summary":"# What this Act does (mechanics first)\n\n- The Act creates a structured system for moving civil cases between the Supreme Court, County Court and Magistrates' Court in Victoria. It sets out specific routes for transfer: general transfers, individual transfers, circuit transfers, administrative transfers and \"other\" transfers (see s 5).\n\n- Who makes transfer decisions and how:\n  - Designated judicial officers of the sending and receiving courts inspect and select cases for transfer (definitions and roles: s 3; selection rules: s 8, s 16).  \n  - Senior judicial officers (Chief Justice, Chief Judge, Chief Magistrate) negotiate agreements about bulk transfers between courts (s 6) and determine objections to proposed transfers (s 11, s 20).  \n  - Registry officers identify candidate files for bulk transfer when senior judicial officers so direct (s 7).  \n  - Registrars or registry officers may effect administrative transfers when a party certifies jurisdictional facts under the case transfer rules (s 26–27).  \n  - The three court heads may jointly make case transfer rules to govern timing, notice and process (s 34). Rules made under the Act override inconsistent court rules (s 35).\n\n- What happens when a transfer is made:\n  - The sending court discontinues the proceedings and must send the record and documents to the receiving court (s 12(2)(a)–(b); s 21(2)(a)–(b)).  \n  - The receiving court applies its procedural rules to the transferred case and, if it is a lower court, may still grant the relief the original court could have granted (s 13(1)(a)–(b); s 22(1)(a)–(b)).  \n  - Transferred cases carry over certain cost entitlements; the Act specifies which costs scale applies for pre‑transfer and post‑transfer conduct and allows courts to make orders about costs (s 13(1)(f)–(g); s 22(1)(f)–(g)).  \n  - An order transferring a case under the general and individual transfer procedures is not appealable (s 12(3); s 21(3)).\n\n- How parties participate and protect their position:\n  - Parties must be notified when their case is selected for transfer (s 9; s 18).  \n  - Parties can file objections within time limits set by case transfer rules (s 10; s 19). Senior judicial officers consider objections and may hear oral submissions (s 11; s 20).  \n  - Designated judicial officers and senior judicial officers may require undertakings as to costs from parties who support or oppose transfer (s 17(6) and (7); s 20(4) and (5)).\n\n- Other structural points:\n  - Transfers may be limited by exclusive jurisdiction: a court only has \"exclusive jurisdiction\" in the Act’s terms if other courts cannot hear that type of proceeding regardless of amount (s 3(2)).  \n  - Some transfers are constrained by jury election rules: a matter cannot be sent to the Magistrates' Court if a jury has been elected or ordered (s 8(3); s 16(2)).  \n  - The Act also records an administrative purpose to alter County Court civil jurisdictional limits and to provide for suspension of certain reserve judge pension entitlements while they hold other public office (s 1(b)–(c)).\n\n# Why the Act says it matters (official purpose claims and mechanical testing)\n\n- Official purpose claims (as stated in s 1): to (a) establish a new system for transferring civil proceedings between courts to improve administrative efficiency; (b) alter County Court jurisdictional limits in civil matters; and (c) provide pension‑suspension and consent requirements for Reserve Supreme or County Court Judges who take other public office or engage in practice.\n\n- Testing those claims against trade‑offs and mechanics in the text:\n  - Efficiency motive: the Act centralises multiple transfer routes, gives court heads power to move workload between courts (s 6, s 24), and requires receiving courts to try to hear transferred matters no later than they otherwise would have been (s 13(1)(d); s 22(1)(d)). Those rules create a direct mechanism for shifting case load between courts.\n  - Costs and incentives: the Act makes costs consequences explicit (pre‑ and post‑transfer costs scales, s 13(1)(f)–(g); s 22(1)(f)–(g)). It allows courts to require undertakings about costs as a condition of transfer (s 17(6); s 20(4)). Those provisions create financial incentives for parties to support or resist transfer, and give courts levers to allocate financial risk.\n  - Procedural trade‑offs: transferred cases submit to the transferee court’s procedures (s 13(1)(b); s 22(1)(b)), which can change how parties present evidence, interlocutory steps or timetabling. The Act also makes transfer orders non‑appealable in the general and individual routes (s 12(3); s 21(3)), reducing parties’ appellate recourse on the transfer decision itself.\n  - Discretion and oversight: the Act concentrates decision-making in judicial officers (designated and senior) and allows those officers to delegate many powers within limits (s 4). Agreements for bulk transfers require council approval (s 6(2)). Case transfer rules are jointly made by the three court heads and may be disallowed by Parliament (s 34(1), (3)). Those features combine judicial discretion with administrative rule‑making and legislative oversight.\n\n# Who pays, who decides, and how behaviour changes (plain statements with section pointers)\n\n- Who decides: designated judicial officers choose candidate cases (s 8; s 16). Senior judicial officers negotiate bulk transfers and decide objections (s 6; s 11; s 20). Registrars and registry officers implement administrative transfers and lodge records (s 7; s 26–27). The Chief Justice, Chief Judge and Chief Magistrate make rules (s 34).\n\n- Who pays (costs and financial consequences): parties remain liable for costs, and the transferee court can order costs and specify the applicable costs scale for pre‑transfer and post‑transfer periods (s 13(1)(f)–(g); s 22(1)(f)–(g); s 31(b)–(c)). Courts may require undertakings about costs from supporters or opposers of transfer (s 17(6); s 20(4)).\n\n- Behaviour changes the Act produces:\n  - Registry staff will have to identify and package files for transfer when directed (s 7(1)–(3)).  \n  - Parties may seek administrative transfers via certification (s 26–27) or move to have a matter referred to designated judicial officers (s 17(1)).  \n  - Parties must monitor case transfer rules for objection periods and procedural requirements (s 10; s 19; s 34).  \n  - Courts will apply their own procedures to incoming cases and may need to reconcile prior steps taken under the transferor court’s rules (s 13(1)(c); s 22(1)(c)).\n\n# Compliance burden, discretion and implementation risks\n\n- Compliance burden on the court system and parties:\n  - Registry officers must identify suitable files, prepare and transfer records and summaries when directed (s 7(1)–(3)).  \n  - Parties must meet timing and form requirements set by case transfer rules for objections and certifications (s 10; s 19; s 26–27; s 34).  \n  - Designated judicial officers may require written submissions and may adjourn consideration for further information (s 17(2)–(4)).\n\n- Sources of discretionary decision‑making and related risks:\n  - Designated judicial officers and senior judicial officers exercise judgment on suitability and convenience of transfer (s 8(2); s 16(1)). Those judgments are partly insulated from appeal (s 12(3); s 21(3)).  \n  - The Act allows delegation of many powers but reserves certain functions (e.g. making agreements under s 6 or s 24(1), making case transfer rules, delegation power itself) to senior officers (s 4). That concentrates strategic choices at court leadership level.\n\n- Implementation risks visible in the text:\n  - Non‑appealability of transfer orders (s 12(3); s 21(3)) reduces a party’s procedural remedy against a transfer decision, which could raise dispute over fairness of exercise of discretion.  \n  - Different procedural regimes and costs scales apply after transfer (s 13(1)(b), (f)–(g); s 22(1)(b), (f)–(g)), which can change litigants’ expense profiles and case management expectations.  \n  - Bulk agreements require council approval (s 6(2)), which adds an extra step and potential delay to implementation.\n\n# Effects on private enterprise, contracts, competition and individual choice (as the Act reads)\n\n- The Act is a procedural statute about where civil disputes are heard rather than a rule that directly regulates commercial activity. Its practical private‑sector effects flow from changing litigation forum and timetabling.\n\n- Direct effects on businesses and contracts:\n  - Forum and timing: moving a case to a different court can change hearing dates and procedural practice, which affects the pace and cost of dispute resolution (s 13(1)(d); s 22(1)(d)).  \n  - Financial incentives: the capacity to require undertakings and the allocation of costs on different scales can alter parties’ economic calculus about pursuing or resisting litigation (s 17(6); s 20(4); s 13(1)(f)–(g); s 22(1)(f)–(g)).  \n\n- Competition, prices, ownership and speech: the Act does not directly regulate markets, prices or ownership nor does it limit speech; any impact would be second‑order through litigation costs or forum advantages for litigants in particular industries (no specific provision in text addresses these topics).\n\n# Concentrated benefits, diffuse costs and other structural observations (mechanism‑based)\n\n- Concentrated benefits: court leadership and registry staff gain tools to manage workloads (s 6; s 7), and a receiving court may gain caseload that better utilises its sitting capacity (s 24(1)).\n\n- Diffuse costs: parties (and their lawyers) bear notification, adherence to new procedural rules, potential shifts in costs scale, and the need to respond quickly to objections or certifications under the case transfer rules (s 9; s 10; s 19; s 26–27; s 34).  \n\n- Rent‑seeking or capture risks: the Act puts discretion in judicial officers and allows agreements between senior officers for bulk transfers (s 6). The text builds in internal checks (council approval s 6(2)) and external rule oversight (case transfer rules can be disallowed by Parliament, s 34(3)), but the Act does not prescribe specific quantitative selection criteria beyond the general legal tests (s 8(2); s 16(1)).\n\n# Bottom line (neutral, mechanical)\n\n- The Act establishes who may move civil cases between the three Victorian courts, the procedures to do so, the roles of registry staff and judicial officers, the rights of parties to be heard and to seek or oppose transfer, and the cost and procedural consequences that follow a transfer. Its powers are supplemented and shaped by case transfer rules made jointly by the courts’ senior officers and are subject to council approvals and parliamentary disallowance in prescribed ways (s 6(2); s 34)."}},"importantCases":[],"_links":{"self":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991","history":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991/history","analysis":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991/analysis","conflicts":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991/conflicts","importantCases":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991/important-cases","documents":"/api/acts/courts-case-transfer-act-1991/documents"}}