What is the power of a court to be the first to hear a case on a specific topic?

Courts deal with different matters depending on their jurisdiction and place in the court hierarchy.

Jurisdiction

Within the state and federal courts systems, there are a number of different courts. Each court has a particular ‘jurisdiction’, which is the scope of a court’s authority to decide matters. The term comes from Latin: ‘juris’ – the law and ‘dictio’ – to say or declare. The jurisdiction given to a court will usually depend on the purpose for which the court was established, which is usually defined in legislation. Which court will have jurisdiction over a case may be based on geographical area, the type of parties who appear, the amount of money involved in the case, or the severity of the maximum penalty for an offence. For example, in NSW, a crime for which the maximum penalty is 14 years imprisonment will probably be heard by the District Court or the Supreme Court, while a crime for which the maximum penalty is only a fine will be heard by the Local Court.

Some courts have a specialised jurisdiction (for example, the Children’s Court) so they deal with cases only in a narrow range of topics, while other courts have a general jurisdiction (such as the state Supreme Courts) to deal with a wide variety of cases. The Supreme Courts of the states and territories are courts of general jurisdiction in that every matter is within the general jurisdiction of a Supreme Court unless specifically excluded.

Another distinction in jurisdiction is between 'original jurisdiction' and 'appellate jurisdiction'. The court where a particular matter is heard for the first time has ‘original jurisdiction’. If there is to be an appeal against the decision of the original court, the court that can hear the appeal has ‘appellate jurisdiction’. See Appeals for more information.

Hierarchy of courts

The Commonwealth has three levels of general federal courts:

• High Court
• Federal Court
• Division 2 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (a continuation of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia).

These courts were established to hear and determine matters arising under Commonwealth laws. The Commonwealth Constitution established the High Court of Australia, which is the highest court in Australia.

The High Court is at the top of the hierarchy of federal courts. It is also at the top of the hierarchy of state courts, because decisions of state Supreme Courts may be able to be appealed to the High Court.

Each of the states (except for Tasmania) also has three levels of courts of general jurisdiction: the state Supreme Court, the District Court (called County Court in Victoria) and the Local Court. Tasmania, the Northern Territory and the Australian Capital Territory do not have an intermediate level court.

Courts are classified as either superior courts or inferior courts. The principal Australian superior courts are:

• High Court
• Federal Court of Australia
• Division 1 of the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (a continuation of the Family Court of Australia)
• Supreme Courts of the states and territories
• Land and Environment Court of New South Wales
• Industrial Relations Commission of New South Wales
• Industrial Court of Queensland.

All courts that are not superior courts are inferior courts. Intermediate courts (such as the District Court of New South Wales) are therefore technically inferior courts. Magistrates make decisions in the lower courts (state local and magistrates courts).

The higher in the hierarchy a court is, the greater the authority their decisions have for other courts. See also Precedent and evidence.

Tribunals

In both state and federal systems there are tribunals which operate in a more informal way to reach decisions on civil matters: see Tribunals for more information.

SECTION 1. The judicial Power of the United States, shall be vested in one supreme Court, and in such inferior Courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish. The Judges, both of the supreme and inferior Courts, shall hold their Offices during good Behaviour, and shall, at stated Times, receive for their Services, a Compensation, which shall not be diminished during their Continuance in Office.

Annotations

Characteristics and Attributes of Judicial Power

Judicial power is the power “of a court to decide and pronounce a judgment and carry it into effect between persons and parties who bring a case before it for decision.”139 It is “the right to determine actual controversies arising between diverse litigants, duly instituted in courts of proper jurisdiction.”140 The terms “judicial power” and “jurisdiction” are frequently used interchangeably, with “jurisdiction” defined as the power to hear and determine the subject matter in controversy between parties to a suit141 or as the “power to entertain the suit, consider the merits and render a binding decision thereon.”142 The cases and commentary however, support, indeed require, a distinction between the two concepts.

Jurisdiction is the authority of a court to exercise judicial power in a specific case and is, of course, a prerequisite to the exercise of judicial power, which is the totality of powers a court exercises when it assumes jurisdiction and hears and decides a case.143 Judicial power confers on federal courts the power to decide a case and to render a judgment that conclusively resolves a case. Included within the general judicial power are the ancillary powers of courts to punish for contempt of their authority,144 to issue writs in aid of jurisdiction when authorized by statute,145 to make rules governing their process in the absence of statutory authorizations or prohibitions,146 to order their own process so as to prevent abuse, oppression, and injustice, and to protect their own jurisdiction and officers in the protection of property in custody of law,147 to appoint masters in chancery, referees, auditors, and other investigators,148 and to admit and disbar attorneys.149

As judicial power is the authority to render dispositive judgments, Congress violates the separation of powers when it purports to alter final judgments of Article III courts.150 Once such instance arose when the Court unexpectedly recognized a statute of limitations for certain securities actions that was shorter than what had been recognized in many jurisdictions, resulting in the dismissal of several suits, which then become final because they were not appealed. Congress subsequently enacted a statute that, though not changing the limitations period prospectively, retroactively extended the time for suits that had been dismissed and provided for the reopening of these final judgments. In Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.,151 the Court invalidated the statute, holding it impermissible for Congress to disturb a final judgment. “Having achieved finality, . . . a judicial decision becomes the last word of the judicial department with regard to a particular case or controversy, and Congress may not declare by retroactive legislation that the law applicable to that very case was something other than what the courts said it was.”152 In Miller v. French,153 by contrast, the Court ruled that the Prison Litigation Reform Act’s automatic stay of ongoing injunctions remedying violations of prisoners’ rights did not amount to an unconstitutional legislative revision of a final judgment. Rather, the automatic stay merely altered “the prospective effect” of injunctions, and it is well established that such prospective relief “remains subject to alteration due to changes in the underlying law.”154

“Shall Be Vested”.—The distinction between judicial power and jurisdiction is especially pertinent to the meaning of the words “shall be vested” in § 1. Whereas all the judicial power of the United States is vested in the Supreme Court and the inferior federal courts created by Congress, neither has ever been vested with all the jurisdiction which could be granted and, Justice Story to the contrary,155 the Constitution has not been read to require that Congress confer the entire jurisdiction it might.156 Thus, except for the original jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, which flows directly from the Constitution, two prerequisites to jurisdiction must be present: first, the Constitution must have given the courts the capacity to receive it,157 and, second, an act of Congress must have conferred it.158 The fact that federal courts are of limited jurisdiction means that litigants in them must affirmatively establish that jurisdiction exists and may not confer nonexistent jurisdiction by consent or conduct.159

What is the power to hear a case for the first time?

What is the term for the power to hear a case?

What is the power of the court?