JURIES REGULATIONS 1983

Jury district: The regulations create two jury districts for the Northern Territory. The Darwin jury district is not the entire Darwin region but is defined by a list of 14 named electoral divisions under the Electoral Act 2004: Blain, Brennan, Casuarina, Drysdale, Fannie Bay, Fong Lim, Goyder, Johnston, Karama, Nelson, Nightcliff, Port Darwin, Sanderson, Spillett, and Wanguri. This list has been amended over time to reflect redistributions. The Alice Springs jury district is the whole municipality of Alice Springs under the Local Government Act 2019. These boundaries determine which residents are drawn from the jury list for each court location.

Monetary unit: The regulations express fees and payments in monetary units rather than fixed dollar amounts. This permits indexation without amending the regulations each time. The value of a monetary unit is determined under the Interpretation of Legislation Act (NT) and changes annually on 1 July. Regulation 6(1A) pegs the fee for a civil trial to the value on the first day of the trial, regardless of subsequent indexation. Regulation 8(2A) contains a special rule for juror payments when a trial spans 1 July: the juror is paid as if the trial commenced after 1 July, so they benefit from any increase in the monetary unit mid-trial.

Random selection by computer: Section 27 of the Juries Act requires random selection of persons to be summoned. Regulation 7 specifies the statistical tolerance: a system that produces a variation from expected value of less than plus or minus 0.5% over a population of 120,000, with percentiles of 12,000. This is a fairly tight tolerance, intended to prevent systematic bias in the selection process. The regulation does not mandate any particular software or algorithm, only the performance standard.

Prescribed fee for civil trial: Regulation 6 is the central financial obligation on the party requesting a jury in a civil trial. The fee structure is regressive in the sense that longer trials incur a higher per-day rate. The fee is 240 monetary units per day for the first nine days, then jumps to 480 monetary units per day for the tenth day onward. This creates a strong cost incentive to settle or limit trial duration. The payment mechanism requires upfront deposit and top-ups on the same day the estimate is exceeded, creating cash flow and administrative burdens.

Juror payments: Two categories exist: (1) employees who receive ordinary pay and have no deductions from leave are deemed to have received payment; (2) others are paid by the sheriff. Base rates are modest: 60 or 120 monetary units per day for jurors who serve, and 20 per day for attendance without service. A financial loss top-up is available, but capped at 30 or 20 monetary units per day, and only for the loss exceeding the base payment. This structure means most employed jurors receive nothing extra from the court, while self-employed persons or casual workers may receive base plus up to 30 monetary units per day (for service) or 20 (for attendance without service). The financial loss provision requires proof to the sheriff’s satisfaction.

Prescribed form: Regulation 10 and Schedule 2 mandate the form of acknowledgement for receipt of a jury summons. The form requires personal details, signature, home and work addresses and phone numbers. The regulations require it to be returned in the envelope provided.

Transitional provisions: Regulation 11 is a one-time transitional rule for trials that commenced before the 2007 amendments and were ongoing at commencement. It required recalculation of the prescribed fee and juror payments as if the trial had commenced after the amendments.

Civil litigants and their legal representatives: The regulations directly impose the obligation to pay jury fees on the party liable under section 8 of the Juries Act. That party must estimate trial length, pre-pay the fee, and monitor actual duration to make top-up payments on the same day the estimate is exceeded. This affects mainly plaintiffs who elect a jury trial, but the liable party may be the defendant depending on the court’s order. The financial stakes are material: a ten-day civil jury trial attracts 4,800 monetary units in fees (10 x 480), while a nine-day trial costs only 2,160 monetary units (9 x 240). The doubling of the daily rate at day ten creates an incentive to complete evidence within nine days. The estimation process imposes an administrative burden: a party that underestimates must act promptly to avoid default, though the regulation does not specify the consequences of non-payment.

Jurors and talesmen: Every person summoned for jury service in the Northern Territory is affected. The regulations set the compensation they receive. For employees who continue to receive ordinary pay (such as public servants under the Public Sector Employment and Management By-laws), the regulations deem them to have received payment, so they receive nothing extra from the court. This effectively forces employed jurors to subsidise the jury system through their employers. For self-employed persons, casual workers, or those whose employers do not pay during jury service, the base rate is available, plus a capped financial loss top-up. The travel allowance only applies to journeys over one kilometre; jurors living within one kilometre of the Supreme Court receive no travel payment.

Employers: The regulations interact with employer obligations. For employees who are paid during jury service without deduction from leave, the employer bears the cost of the employee’s absence. This is not a direct obligation imposed by the regulations but is a consequence of the deeming provision. Employers who do not pay during jury service may expose their employees to financial loss, which the employee can claim from the sheriff up to capped amounts.

The Sheriff and court administrators: The sheriff (or deputy sheriff) determines whether an employee is deemed to have received payment under regulation 8(1), and if not, calculates and pays the base amount. The sheriff also adjudicates claims for financial loss. Court administrators must process the fee estimates, payments, and refunds under regulation 6. They also oversee the random selection system to ensure it meets the statistical tolerance.

The public and taxpayers: The jury system is funded by the public purse for criminal trials, but for civil trials the costs are borne by the litigants. The regulations therefore reduce the burden on taxpayers for civil trials. However, the fixed fee structure may deter some litigants from exercising their right to a jury trial, shifting disputes to judge-alone trials and potentially affecting court efficiency.

Legislators and drafters: The regulations are subject to amendment. Changes to electoral divisions (via the Electoral Act) or municipal boundaries (via the Local Government Act) automatically affect jury district definitions, which can alter the composition of jury pools. The use of monetary units simplifies indexation but creates uncertainty about the actual dollar amount until the relevant date.

Duty of the party liable for civil jury fee: Under regulation 6(2), the party must (a) before the court sits on the first day of trial, submit a written estimate of trial length and pay an amount equal to the prescribed fee for that estimated length; (b) if the estimate is exceeded, before the trial resumes on the first day the estimate is exceeded, submit a revised estimate and pay the additional amount (total fee for the revised estimate minus amount already paid); (c) repeat the process if further exceeded. The duty is ongoing throughout the trial. The party also has a right to a refund if the amount paid exceeds the fee actually payable at the end of the trial (regulation 6(4)).

Duty of the court: A day is counted as a whole day for fee purposes if the court sits with the jury for part of a day (regulation 6(3)). This prevents parties from splitting days to reduce fees.

Rights of jurors and talesmen: Regulation 8 confers rights to payment for attendance. An employee who continues to receive ordinary pay and has no deductions from other leave entitlements is taken to have received payment, meaning they have no right to further payment from the sheriff (though they may still claim financial loss if applicable). For others, the sheriff must pay: for each day or part day of service as a juror for a trial, 60 monetary units (9 days or less) or 120 monetary units (10 days or more); for attendance without service, 20 monetary units per day. A juror may also claim an additional amount for financial loss, up to 30 monetary units per day if they served, or 20 monetary units if they attended but did not serve. The additional amount is the lesser of (a) the loss exceeding the base payment and (b) the cap. The juror bears the burden of proving financial loss to the sheriff’s satisfaction.

Right to travel allowance: Under regulation 9, a person whose residence is more than one kilometre from the relevant Supreme Court is entitled to be paid for each journey between residence and court to attend as a juror or talesman, and for the return journey. The fare is the cost of public transport if available, otherwise 0.27 monetary units per kilometre by the shortest practicable road route. This is a flat payment per journey, not per day, so the juror must claim for each trip.

Duty to use prescribed form: Regulation 10 and Schedule 2 require that the acknowledgement of receipt of jury summons be in the form set out. The form must be completed in accordance with directions and instructions specified in the form. The juror must fill in personal details, sign, and return the acknowledgement in the envelope provided, while retaining the summons part to bring to court.

Transitional rights: Regulation 11 preserves rights for certain trials that straddled the 2007 amendments. For any such trial, the prescribed amounts under regulations 6 and 8 are recalculated as if the trial commenced after the commencement of the 2007 regulations, ensuring the higher rates apply.

The Juries Regulations 1983 do not themselves create offences or prescribe penalties. The regulations are made under the Juries Act 1962, and any enforcement mechanisms for non-compliance with procedural requirements would derive from the Act rather than the regulations. The regulations are silent on what happens if a party fails to pay the prescribed fee on time, or if a juror fails to return the acknowledgement. Practitioners must consult the Juries Act for penalty provisions for failing to attend jury service or failing to comply with a summons or direction. The regulations only set the quantum of fees and payments and the mechanics of selection.

Potential consequences: For the civil trial fee, regulation 6 requires payment before the court sits and top-ups before the trial resumes after an estimate is exceeded. A party that fails to pay may find the trial delayed or the jury discharged, but the regulations do not spell this out. The court would likely exercise its inherent power to manage proceedings, possibly ordering the party to pay as a condition of proceeding. The refund mechanism (regulation 6(4)) provides a remedy for overpayment, but there is no express penalty for underpayment.

For jurors: Failure to return the acknowledgement in the prescribed form (regulation 10) may technically be a breach of the Act’s requirement to respond to a summons, but the regulations do not add additional penalties. The financial loss claim requires proof; a juror who falsely claims loss may be subject to general fraud offences.

Enforcement of payment obligations: The sheriff is responsible for paying jurors under regulation 8. If the sheriff refuses payment incorrectly, a juror could seek judicial review. Conversely, the sheriff may recover overpayments if a juror was paid but also received ordinary pay? Not specified.

Random selection compliance: Regulation 7 sets a standard for random selection systems. If the system fails to meet the statistical tolerance, the selection may be challengeable, potentially invalidating the jury panel. Given the regulation’s language (“any system … which … gives a variation …”), it is permissive rather than mandatory, but a challenge would likely require expert evidence.

Interaction with Act penalties: Section 68 of the Juries Act deals with the form of acknowledgement; regulation 10 prescribes the form. A juror who returns an incomplete or incorrect form may not have complied with the Act, but the regulations do not specify the consequences.

Overall, the regulations focus on prescribing amounts and procedures, not on enforcement. The enforcement teeth are in the Act. This creates an ambiguity: the fee payment regime is mandatory in the regulations, but the consequence of non-payment is left to the court’s discretion, increasing uncertainty for litigants.

Juries Act 1962 (NT): The regulations are made directly under this Act. Every regulation references specific sections: section 20 for jury districts, section 8 for civil trial fees, section 27 for random selection, section 60 for juror fees, and section 68(2)(d) for the form of acknowledgement. The regulations give detailed content to these enabling provisions. Any amendment to the Act may require consequential amendment to the regulations.

Electoral Act 2004 (NT): Regulation 4(2) defines “division” by reference to section 3 of the Electoral Act. The named electoral divisions in the Darwin jury district are terms of art under the Electoral Act. Changes to the boundaries or names of these divisions automatically alter the jury district without requiring amendment of the regulations. This cross-reference reduces the frequency of regulation amendments but creates a dependency: practitioners must check the current Electoral Act to know precisely which geographic areas are included.

Local Government Act 2019 (NT): Regulation 5(2) defines “municipality” for the Alice Springs jury district by reference to section 15 of the Local Government Act. The jury district is the entire municipality of Alice Springs. Changes to the municipality boundaries (e.g., amalgamations or adjustments) would automatically change the jury district. The Local Government Act 2019 commenced in parts on 1 July 2021 and 1 July 2022, and a 2021 amending Act updated the reference in regulation 5.

Public Sector Employment and Management By-laws: The example to regulation 8(1) references by-law 20 of these by-laws, which allows the Chief Executive Officer to release an employee for jury service without deduction from pay or leave credits. The regulation deems such an employee to have received payment. This links the jury payment scheme to the public sector employment framework. Private sector employers are not covered by this by-law, so their employees may be entitled to sheriff payments.

Interpretation of Legislation Act (NT): The concept of “monetary unit” is defined in this Act. The regulations do not need to specify dollar amounts annually; they change via the monetary unit value. This interacts with the timing rules in regulations 6(1A) and 8(2A) to determine which value applies.

Statute Law Revision Acts: The endnotes list amendments made by the Statute Law Revision Act (No. 2) 2003 and Statute Law Revision Act 2020. These acts made formal amendments (e.g., updating cross-references) without changing substance. The Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018 also made general formal amendments.

Previous versions of the regulations: The regulations have been amended numerous times, including a major restructuring in 2007. The transitional provision (regulation 11) shows interaction with the 2007 regulations: trials straddling that amendment are treated as if they commenced after the amendment, to ensure uniform application of the new rates. This demonstrates that amendments can be retrospective for trials already in progress.

The Juries Regulations 1983 were originally notified on 21 October 1983 and commenced the same day. They have been amended multiple times since. The key amendments, as reflected in the endnotes and list of amendments, are:

• 1987: Amendment of the Juries Regulations (SL No. 4, 1987) - notified 11 February 1987, commenced same day. This made changes to regulation 5 (Alice Springs district), probably to reflect changes to municipal boundaries.

• 1989: Juries Regulations (SL No. 40, 1989) - notified 10 January 1990, commenced same day. Amended regulation 4 (Darwin district), likely adding or renaming divisions.

• 1990: Juries Amendment Act 1990 (Act No. 63, 1990) - assented 14 December 1990, commenced same day. This amended the enabling Act and made consequential amendments to regulations 2, 3, 4, and 5. The original regulation 3 was amended and later repealed.

• 1997: Amendment of Juries Regulations (SL No. 30, 1997) - notified 12 November 1997, commenced same day. Amended regulation 4 (Darwin district), likely to update division names after electoral redistribution.

• 2003: Statute Law Revision Act (No. 2) 2003 (Act No. 44, 2003) - assented 7 July 2003, commenced same day. Made formal amendments to regulation 3, updating legislative references.

• 2004: Electoral (Consequential Amendments) Act 2004 (Act No. 12, 2004) - assented 1 March 2004, commenced 15 March 2004. Amended regulations to reflect the new Electoral Act 2004, replacing references to the former electoral legislation.

• 2007: Juries Amendment Regulations 2007 (SL No. 27, 2007) - notified 22 August 2007, commenced same day. This was a major amendment: it replaced regulation 2 (repealed), amended regulation 4, substituted regulation 6 (fee for civil trial) entirely, amended regulation 7, substituted regulations 8 and 9, deleted Schedule 1, amended Schedule 2, and inserted transitional regulation 11. This overhaul introduced the two-tier fee structure for civil trials (240/480 monetary units), the revised juror payments (60/120 base rates), and the travel allowance structure.

• 2010: Juries Amendment Regulations 2010 (SL No. 27, 2010) - notified 29 November 2010, commenced same day. Repealed regulation 3 (which had previously dealt with another jury district, probably Katherine, which was removed), substituted regulation 4 (Darwin district) to update division names, and amended regulation 5.

• 2017: Juries Amendment Regulations 2017 (SL No. 6, 2017) - notified 12 April 2017, commenced same day. Amended regulation 4 (Darwin district) by adding Spillett as a new electoral division (regulation 4(1)(ma)).

• 2019: Juries Amendment Regulations 2019 (SL No. 8, 2019) - notified 19 June 2019, commenced 1 July 2019. Amended regulation 6 (fee for civil trial), regulation 8 (juror payments), and regulation 9 (fares). This was to update the monetary unit amounts and possibly the kilometre rate.

• 2020: Statute Law Revision Act 2020 (Act No. 26, 2020) - assented 19 November 2020, commenced 20 November 2020. Made formal amendments not specified in detail but likely updating references.

• 2021: Local Government Amendment Act 2021 (Act No. 15, 2021) - assented 25 May 2021, commenced 26 May 2021. Amended regulation 5 to replace the reference to the former Local Government Act with the Local Government Act 2019.

Additionally, the Interpretation Legislation Amendment Act 2018 (Act No. 22, 2018) made general amendments of a formal nature to regulations 1, 4, and 5.

The regulations are subject to ongoing revision as electoral boundaries and municipal definitions change, and as monetary values are adjusted.

The Juries Regulations 1983 are subordinate legislation of an administrative and financial nature. They have not themselves been the subject of reported litigation in the Northern Territory. No cases are cited in the source text. The regulations are not the kind of instrument that typically gives rise to direct legal challenge, as they are procedural and prescribe amounts. Disputes about jury fees or juror payments would likely be resolved by the sheriff or court in the ordinary course of trial management, not by separate litigation on the regulations.

However, the enabling Juries Act 1962 has likely been litigated in various contexts, such as challenges to the validity of jury selection, excuses from service, or contempt. The regulations govern the mechanics of selection (random selection standard) and the form of acknowledgement. A challenge to a jury panel could potentially involve the random selection standard in regulation 7, but that would require statistical evidence of deviation exceeding the 0.5% tolerance. There is no reported instance of such a challenge in the public record based on these regulations.

The payment provisions in regulations 6 and 8 could theoretically be the subject of a dispute if a party refuses to pay the fee or a juror claims inadequate compensation. Such disputes are generally handled administratively, not through separate declaratory proceedings.

The transitional provision (regulation 11) was a one-time rule for the 2007 amendments. It may have been applied in trials ongoing in August 2007, but no litigation about its application is recorded.

The lack of litigation history suggests the regulations operate without substantial controversy, which is typical for jury regulations in small jurisdictions. The amounts are modest, and the procedures are routine. Legal practitioners would be well advised nonetheless to review the current version of the regulations and the Juries Act before advising clients on fee obligations or juror entitlements.

Fee doubles on day ten: A civil jury trial lasting 10 days or more attracts a fee of 480 monetary units per day, compared to 240 for 9 days or fewer. This doubling applies to all days of the trial, not just from day ten onward. Regulation 6(1) is clear: the prescribed fee is (a) if the trial lasts 9 days or less - 240 per day; or (b) if the trial lasts 10 days or more - 480 per day. So a trial that lasts exactly 10 days costs 4,800 monetary units, which is twice the cost if it had lasted 9 days (2,160). This creates a strong financial cliff. Parties need to consider whether to settle or cap evidence to avoid crossing the threshold.

Estimates and top-ups must be made on the same day the estimate is exceeded: Regulation 6(2)(b) requires the party to submit a revised estimate and pay the additional amount before the trial resumes on the first day on which the estimate is exceeded. If the trial resumes at 10 am and the estimate was for 8 days, but the court sits on day 9, the party must have paid the extra before that day’s sitting. The regulation does not allow for grace periods. Failure to pay may risk the trial being adjourned or the jury discharged.

Refund only after trial: Overpayment is refunded at the end of the trial (regulation 6(4)). This means the party’s money is tied up for the duration of the trial. For long trials, this could be a cash flow issue.

Monetary unit timing mismatch: The fee is calculated based on the value of a monetary unit on the first day of the trial (regulation 6(1A)). However, juror payments for a trial that spans 1 July are calculated as if the trial commenced after 1 July (regulation 8(2A)). This asymmetry means the fee may be based on a lower monetary unit if the trial starts before 1 July, while juror payments may be based on a higher unit if the trial continues after 1 July. The party paying the fee benefits; the juror may benefit. But if the trial starts after 1 July, both fee and juror payments use the same updated monetary unit.

Financial loss cap is modest: The additional amount for financial loss is capped at 30 monetary units per day for service as a juror, or 20 for attendance without service. Even if the juror proves a loss of, say, $500 per day, they only get the base payment plus up to 30 monetary units extra. The cap may not compensate high-income earners, potentially making jury service a financial hardship for self-employed professionals. The cap also requires proof to the sheriff’s satisfaction, creating a burden of documentation.

Deeming provision excludes most employed jurors: Regulation 8(1) deems employees who continue to receive ordinary pay without deductions from leave to have received payment. This means they get nothing extra from the court. Only if the sheriff is satisfied that this does not apply (e.g., the employer does not pay or deducts leave) does the juror get the base rate. This shifts the cost of jury service to employers, which may be a hidden tax on business.

Travel allowance only over one kilometre: Jurors living within one kilometre of the Supreme Court receive no travel payment. In practice, many urban residents will not qualify. The fare is capped at public transport cost, or if none, 0.27 monetary units per kilometre - a modest rate.

Jury district definitions depend on external legislation: The Darwin district is defined by electoral division names under the Electoral Act 2004. Those divisions change periodically. A person may live in an area that falls within a named division today but not tomorrow, or vice versa. The regulations themselves are not amended each time; they incorporate by reference. Similarly, the Alice Springs district is the whole municipality, which can change under the Local Government Act. Practitioners must check the current versions of those acts to know the jury district boundaries.

Random selection tolerance is narrow: The permissible variation of plus or minus 0.5% over 120,000 population may be difficult to achieve with small jury pools or if the computer system has a bias. A party challenging a jury panel could potentially argue the system does not meet this standard, but they would need expert evidence.

No express penalty for non-payment of fee: The regulations do not state what happens if a party fails to pay the fee on time. This uncertainty could lead to disputes. Parties should ensure compliance to avoid risking the trial.

For the party liable for civil jury fee: Before the first day of trial, estimate the number of days the trial will last. Use the monetary unit value on that day to calculate the fee: 240 units per day for 9 days or less, 480 per day for 10 days or more. Pay that amount to the court before the court sits on the first day. Record the estimate and payment. Monitor the trial progress. If the trial exceeds the estimated length, before the trial resumes on the first day the estimate is exceeded, submit a written revised estimate and pay the difference (total fee for the revised period minus amount already paid). Repeat each time the estimate is exceeded. Keep all payment receipts. After the trial, if the total paid exceeds the fee actually payable (based on actual days the court sat with the jury, counting part days as whole days), apply for a refund of the overpayment.

For the party’s legal team: Advise the client of the cash flow commitment. Consider whether a nine-day trial is feasible to avoid the doubling of the daily rate. If the trial is likely to run into a second week, the fee per day jumps, which may affect settlement discussions. Ensure the estimate is realistic to avoid frequent top-ups. Have a process in place to make payments promptly on the day the estimate is exceeded; this may require the solicitor or client to attend court early with payment.

For jurors: Upon receiving a jury summons, complete the acknowledgement form in Schedule 2: fill in personal details, sign, and return it in the provided envelope. Keep the summons part to bring to court on the appointed day. If attending court, keep track of days of service and days of attendance without service. If your employer continues to pay your ordinary wage without requiring you to use leave, you are taken to have received payment and will receive no further payment from the sheriff. If your employer does not pay, or if you are self-employed or a casual worker, you may claim the base payment from the sheriff. To claim the additional amount for financial loss, prepare evidence of the loss (e.g., lost wages, business receipts, statutory declarations) and submit it to the sheriff. The additional amount is capped at 30 monetary units per day for trial service or 20 for attendance without service, and only the excess over the base payment. For travel, if your residence is more than one kilometre from the Supreme Court, claim the fare: use public transport and request the fare amount, or if no public transport, claim 0.27 monetary units per kilometre for each journey (to and from court). Keep records of distances and transport costs.

For employers: If you employ a person summoned for jury service, you may choose to continue to pay their ordinary wage without deducting from leave. If you do, the employee is deemed to have received payment and cannot claim from the sheriff. If you do not pay, the employee may claim from the sheriff, and you may need to provide evidence that the employee was not paid. The regulations do not require you to pay; it is your choice. However, if you do not pay, the employee may suffer financial loss and may claim a capped amount from the sheriff.

For the sheriff and court staff: Process the fee payments and estimates. Verify that the party has paid before the court sits. Accept revised estimates and payments on the day the estimate is exceeded. At the end of trial, calculate the fee actually payable and refund overpayment. For juror payments, determine whether regulation 8(1) applies: if the juror is an employee who continued to receive ordinary pay without leave deductions, note that they are taken to have received payment; do not pay them. If not, pay the base rate per day of service or attendance. Evaluate claims for financial loss; require proof (e.g., payslips, tax returns, business records). Pay travel allowances where distance exceeds one kilometre, using public transport cost if available, otherwise the kilometre rate. Maintain records of random selection system performance to ensure compliance with regulation 7 tolerance. Use the prescribed form for acknowledgements and ensure jurors complete it correctly.

For system administrators: Ensure the computer selection system meets the statistical variation standard of less than plus or minus 0.5% over a population of 120,000 with percentiles of 12,000. If the system is changed, test it against this standard.

For legislative drafters: When amending the regulations, check cross-references to the Electoral Act and Local Government Act. Update division names and municipal references. Consider the impact on existing trials: transitional provisions may be needed if fees or payments change.