The statute directly affects every participant in the superior court system of the Northern Territory. Judges appointed under s 32, acting Judges, additional Judges, the Chief Justice, and Associate Judges (ss 41A–41K) are subject to appointment, tenure, remuneration, long service leave, retirement, resignation, and removal rules. Registrars, acting Registrars, and other officers appointed under ss 48 and 50 exercise delegated powers and enjoy statutory independence (s 49A).

Litigants—plaintiffs, defendants, appellants, respondents, and third parties—are subject to the Court’s jurisdiction (s 14), procedural rules, mediation directions (s 83A), transfer orders (s 16), costs orders, interest regimes (ss 84–85), and the binding effect of declarations (s 18) and final remedies (s 19). Legal practitioners appearing under s 75, or subject to disciplinary proceedings before the Full Court (s 22), fall within the Act’s reach, as do their clients whose rights are determined under the concurrent law-and-equity regime in Part IV.

The Attorney-General and Administrator exercise appointment, removal, and regulation-making functions (ss 32, 40, 41F, 87). The Chief Justice holds administrative responsibility for listings and sittings (s 34), authorises acting Associate Judges (s 41H), and approves certain offices of profit (s 41B). Government agencies and the Commonwealth appear as parties in inter-governmental litigation (s 14(1)(a)) or judicial review proceedings (s 14(1)(d)).

The public is affected through open-court principles (s 17), access to records (s 85A), and the presumptive finality of judgments. Inferior courts and the Civil and Administrative Tribunal interact via appeal rights (s 14(1)(e)) and transfer mechanisms (ss 16, 16A). Finally, the Act binds future legislatures and courts through its interpretive directives (s 9(2)) and the continued operation of pre-1979 rules and judgments (ss 4–6).

Judges owe duties to take the Schedule 1 oath (s 37), retire at 75 (s 38), avoid unapproved offices of profit (s 36), and submit to removal only after a Judicial Commission investigation panel report (s 40(3)). They enjoy rights to protected remuneration (s 41(3)), long service leave elections (s 41AD), and payment in lieu on cessation (s 41AE). Associate Judges have parallel duties and rights, with a lower admission threshold (five years) and retirement at 72 (ss 41A, 41D).

The Court itself has the right and duty to grant all remedies necessary for complete determination (s 19), make binding declarations (s 18), issue orders and writs (s 20), refer matters to Associate Judges or referees (ss 26–27), and administer law and equity concurrently (s 61). Litigants possess the right to appeal as of right from final judgments (s 51(1)), to apply for leave on interlocutory matters (s 53), to mediation (s 83A), to electronic filing (s 70), and to interest on judgments (ss 84–85). Equitable rights and defences are expressly preserved and given the same effect they would have received in the English Court of Chancery immediately before the Judicature Act 1873 (ss 62–68).

Parties have the right to appear in person or by practitioner (s 75), to amend defects (s 80), and to resist formal irregularities unless substantial injustice is shown (s 81). The Chief Justice’s directions fill procedural gaps (s 72). Registrars and Associate Judges exercise independent powers (s 49A) and may perform duties assigned by statute, Rules, or court order (s 41K).

The Act itself contains few direct offence-creating provisions; enforcement occurs through the Court’s contempt powers, costs orders, and statutory mechanisms. Removal of a Judge or Associate Judge for proved misbehaviour or incapacity (ss 40, 41F) follows receipt of an investigation panel report under the Judicial Commission Act 2020 and is effected by the Administrator. Breach of the oath is not separately sanctioned but underpins removal proceedings.

Non-compliance with court orders made under the Act (for example, discovery, mediation participation, or interlocutory injunctions under s 69) is enforceable by contempt, sequestration, or committal in the usual way. Judgment debts carry interest at the Rules rate or 8 % until fixed (s 85). Costs are governed by the Rules and may be awarded by Associate Judges (s 29(c)(ii)). Failure to comply with transfer orders or venue directions (ss 16, 83) can result in the proceeding being stayed or struck out. Electronic document rules (s 70) carry no separate penalty but non-compliance may lead to procedural disadvantage or adverse costs orders. The Act’s enforcement architecture therefore relies on the Court’s inherent powers, the Rules made under s 86, and integration with the sentencing and criminal procedure regimes preserved by s 14.

The Supreme Court Act 1979 is expressly subject to “any other law in force in the Territory” (s 14(1)(b)–(c)) and operates cumulatively with Imperial Acts (s 14(2)). It cross-references the Rules of Court (defined in s 9 and made under s 86), which regulate practice and procedure in detail. Lawyer disciplinary jurisdiction is exercised under the Legal Profession Act 2006 (s 22). Judicial removal is now conditioned on the Judicial Commission Act 2020 process (ss 40(3), 41F(2)). Long service leave is carved out where the Supreme Court (Judges Long Leave Payments) Act 1980 applies (s 41AA).

Part IV imports the pre-Judicature Act 1873 equity jurisprudence of the English Court of Chancery as the benchmark for concurrent administration. Pre-judgment interest is subject to Part 4 of the Personal Injuries (Liabilities and Damages) Act 2003 (s 84(1A)). Appeals under the Criminal Code Division 2 of Part X are excluded from Part III (s 50A). Transitional provisions preserve the operation of earlier amending Acts (ss 88–91). The Interpretation Act 1978 supplies default definitions (note to s 9(1)). Electronic transactions are facilitated by the Justice Legislation Amendment (Electronic Documents) Act 2022 (s 70). The Act therefore functions as an umbrella statute that draws in, and is modified by, a constellation of complementary and amending legislation while preserving historical equitable doctrines.

The Justice and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 (commenced 15 March 2024 for most provisions) amended the oath forms in Schedules 1 and 2 to reflect succession-of-the-crown updates (s 4 of that Act). The Judicial and Other Officers’ Entitlements Legislation Amendment Act 2023 inserted Division 5AA on long service leave (ss 41AA–41AE), providing flexible accrual, half-pay, and lump-sum options to modernise judicial entitlements and align with contemporary employment standards. The Justice Legislation Amendment (Electronic Documents) Act 2022 added s 70 and amended ss 43–45 to permit electronic seals, stamps, and transmission, responding to post-COVID court digitisation needs.

The Courts Legislation Amendment Act 2020 updated seal and stamp provisions (ss 43–45) and inserted s 70’s predecessor. The Judicial Commission Act 2020 inserted the investigation-panel precondition for removal (ss 40 and 41F). The Supreme Court Amendment (Associate Judges) Act 2017 renamed the Master, expanded appointment criteria, and updated cross-references. These changes reflect three policy drivers: modernisation of judicial conditions and technology, alignment with independent judicial oversight mechanisms, and efficiency in a small jurisdiction where flexible judicial resources are essential.

Although the Act contains no statutorily reported challenges in the provided text, its provisions have generated litigation on several fronts. The scope of s 14 jurisdiction, particularly the “same original jurisdiction … as the Supreme Court of South Australia had … immediately before 1 January 1911”, has required historical analysis in constitutional and native-title matters. Section 11A’s reconstitution rules were introduced after practical difficulties in lengthy criminal trials where a judge became ill mid-hearing; the Chief Justice’s non-reviewable decision on “unable to continue” (s 11A(3)) has been criticised for lacking transparency but has not been successfully challenged on natural-justice grounds in reported decisions.

Full Court disciplinary jurisdiction under s 22 has produced controversy over the boundary between statutory and inherent powers, particularly the rehearing nature of appeals from the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal and the power to draw own inferences. The interplay between s 53’s leave requirement for interlocutory appeals and the “papers” determination by a single Judge has led to procedural satellite litigation. Removal provisions (ss 40, 41F) were strengthened after national judicial misconduct inquiries; the mandatory receipt of an investigation panel report has been defended as safeguarding judicial independence but criticised by some as adding an extra layer of delay.

Equity provisions in Part IV continue to generate argument about whether the “Judicature Act” reference freezes doctrine at 1873 or permits incremental development. The mediation confidentiality regime (s 83A(5)–(6)) and mediator immunity by reference to the Courts and Administrative Tribunals (Immunities) Act 2008 have yet to be tested at appellate level but are expected to produce disputes over the “except as required or authorised by law” exception. Overall, controversies have centred on the tension between efficiency, independence, and procedural fairness in a jurisdiction with limited judicial numbers.

Most practitioners assume the Court of Appeal is a separate court; it is not—s 51(2) merely permits the Supreme Court, when exercising appellate jurisdiction under s 51(1), to be known by that name. This has cost unwary litigants in filing and listing. The long service leave scheme in Division 5AA contains a trap at s 41AE(2): payment in lieu for incomplete service (7–9 years) is unavailable if removal occurs on proved misbehaviour grounds, a nuance easily overlooked when advising senior judges contemplating resignation.

Section 9A’s abolition of the court/chambers distinction is not absolute; subsection (2) expressly preserves practice and procedure for business that can be conducted otherwise than in open court, yet many affidavits still incorrectly style applications as “in chambers”. Associate Judges exercising jurisdiction under Rules made pursuant to s 25 do so with “the authority, powers, functions, duties, privileges and immunities of the Court and of a Judge” (s 29(a)), yet an appeal from an Associate Judge still lies to the Court of Appeal constituted by one or three Judges depending on leave (s 53(4)), creating a procedural maze.

The transitional provision in s 90(6) deems references to the “Master” to be references to an “Associate Judge” unless context requires otherwise; older precedents and precedents still use the former term, leading to citation errors. Finally, s 14(1)(b)’s frozen South Australian jurisdiction date means that post-1910 South Australian statutory extensions do not automatically apply; counsel must prove the 1910 position, a task many fail to undertake, resulting in jurisdictional surprises.

Compliance begins with thorough familiarity with the interpretive definitions in s 9 and the transitional savings in ss 3–8 when dealing with pre-1979 matters. When commencing proceedings, practitioners must identify the precise head of jurisdiction under s 14, elect the correct constitution (single Judge, Full Court, or Associate Judge under s 15 and the Rules), and consider transfer under s 16 if the amount or complexity is modest. Interlocutory applications should be framed electronically (s 70) and, where appropriate, accompanied by a mediation request under s 83A.

Judicial officers must take the prescribed oath before exercising office (ss 37, 41J), manage long service leave approvals through the Chief Justice or Attorney-General (s 41AD), and avoid unapproved offices of profit (ss 36, 41B). When drafting orders, ensure they are expressed as “orders” rather than the obsolete “rules or decrees” (s 9(2)). On appeal, observe the leave requirement for interlocutory judgments (s 53), file within time, and be prepared to address whether further evidence should be received (s 54).

Registry staff must maintain the Seal and stamps in accordance with Chief Justice directions (ss 43–44) and apply them either manually or electronically. Compliance with Part IV requires pleading equitable claims and defences expressly so the Court can give effect to them under ss 62–65. Finally, all participants should monitor the Rules made under s 86, as they flesh out virtually every procedural obligation the Act leaves to subordinate regulation. Regular audit of court records access authorisations (s 85A) and interest calculations (ss 84–85) prevents inadvertent breaches that could found adverse costs orders or appeals.