Courts Administration Service
Symbol of the Government of Canada

Annual Report 2011–2012


Warning This Web page has been archived on the Web.

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats by contacting us.

Supporting the Delivery of Justice for all Canadians

Message from the Chief Administrator

Every day the employees of Courts Administration Service (CAS) play a key role in delivering quality services to the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, the Tax Court of Canada, as well as to their clients. Our work has a direct impact on our standard of living and quality of life. Canadians and foreigners depend on CAS to support the delivery of justice and provide timely and fair access to the litigation process of the four superior independent courts it serves.

This report highlights progress made during fiscal year 2011–12 and how CAS continues to transform itself and keep abreast of its clients’ needs by improving security measures, investing in technology, streamlining processes and refining its governance structure to better address the unique requirements of each court.

During the past year, we have worked closely with the Chief Justices to further enhance collaboration and cooperation with the four courts, which have specific and often divergent requirements. By proactively soliciting input from all members of the courts, we have fostered an environment which welcomes change and thus enables us to improve the quality and efficiency of our judicial and registry services. Upholding this client-service approach has been and continues to be central to our capacity to deliver on our mandate while meeting the evolving needs of the courts and their users.

The past year has been a demanding year for CAS, and in particular for our employees, and I am well aware that more challenges lie ahead. As we embarked on a program of change to inject fresh ideas into the way we operate and provide services, CAS is still facing severe financial challenges. To address CAS’ particular situation, we will continue to review the organization’s current funding model and develop a long-term solution that provides value for all Canadians and continues to support Canada’s justice system.

I wish to express my sincere gratitude to the Chief Justices, the Judges, and the Prothonotaries for their ongoing collaboration and their continued support throughout this challenging period.

I invite you to read this report, which details CAS’ achievements in 2011–12 and testifies to the tremendous amount of work performed by CAS employees across the country. I am grateful for their dedication to service excellence and exemplary level of commitment to our success.

Daniel Gosselin,
Chef Administrator
Courts Administration Service

Table of Contents

I Overview
Mandate
Judicial Independence
Role of the Chief Administrator
Governance

II The Courts We Support
Federal Court of Appeal
Federal Court
Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
Tax Court of Canada

III Building Partnerships
Provincial and Territorial Partnerships
International Partnerships
Other Important Collaboration

IV The Year in Brief
Maintaining Core Judicial and Registry Services to the Four Courts
Strengthening Security
Modernizing Technology
Maximizing the use of our Limited Resources
Fostering a Positive and Empowering Work Environment
Improving Communications
Strengthening Planning and Accountability

V Courts Statistics

VI Financial Highlights

Appendix 1 – Acronyms

Appendix 2 – Glossary

Contact Us

Mission

Provide timely and accurate registry, judicial and corporate services to the four superior courts and to their clients in the most innovative and effective manner, while promoting a healthy workplace and encouraging employees’ ongoing contribution to service delivery excellence.

Values

  • Transparency is essential to effective and productive communication.
  • Respect is fundamental to a diverse and productive workplace.
  • Innovation is a continuous process to improve the way we do business.
  • Wellness is key to helping employees attain a healthy work-life balance.
  • Excellence is the standard in everything we do.

To support the delivery of justice for all Canadians,

CAS aims to:

  • Better anticipate the needs of the courts and their users.
  • Develop innovative solutions to respond to those needs.
  • Provide service excellence and ongoing service improvements.

I Overview

We bring real value to Canadians and foreigners by providing judicial, registry and corporate services to the four federal superior courts.

The Courts Administration Service (CAS) was established on July 2, 2003 by the Courts Adminis­tration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c.8. The role of CAS is to provide registry, judicial and corporate services to the four federal superior courts of record, thereby helping to maintain the independence of these courts from the government. The four courts served by CAS are the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada.

The services provided by CAS enable the courts to function and members of the courts to hear and resolve cases in a fair, expeditious and efficient manner. They assist individuals, organizations and the Government of Canada to submit disputes and other matters to the courts.

CAS’ model for the administration of court services is unique internationally and continues to attract the attention of jurisdictions around the globe.

Mandate

In accordance with section 2 of the Courts Administration Service Act, the Courts Administration Service is mandated to:

  • Facilitate coordination and cooperation among the four courts for the purpose of ensuring the effective and efficient provision of administrative services;
  • Enhance judicial independence by placing administrative services at arm’s length from the Government of Canada and by affirming the roles of Chief Justices and judges in the management of the courts; and
  • Enhance accountability for the use of public money in support of court administration while safeguarding the independence of the judiciary.

Judicial Independence

Judicial independence is a cornerstone of the Canadian judicial system. Under the Constitution, the judiciary is separate from, and independent of, the executive and legislative branches of the Government of Canada. Judicial independence is a guarantee that judges will make decisions free of influence and based solely on fact and law. It has three components: security of tenure, financial security and administrative independence.

Role of the Chief Administrator

The Chief Administrator of CAS is the chief executive officer of the organization and is accountable to Parliament through the Minister of Justice.

Section 7(2) of the Courts Administration Service Act specifies that the Chief Administrator has all the powers necessary for:

  • Providing effective and efficient management and administration of court services, including court facilities, libraries, corporate services and staffing; and
  • Structuring registry operations and preparing budgets, in consultation with the Chief Justices of the four courts, for the requirements of those courts and the related needs of CAS.

Section 8 of the Courts Administration Service Act provides that the Chief Justices are responsible for the judicial functions of their courts; this includes the power to determine the sittings of the court, assign judges to sittings, determine the sitting schedules and places of sittings for judges and determine the total annual, monthly and weekly workload of judges. Moreover, officers, clerks and employees of CAS act at the direction of the respective Chief Justices in matters that are assigned by law to the judiciary.

Subsections 7(4) and 9(1) of the Courts Administration Service Act place two specific restrictions on the powers of the Chief Administrator:

  • The powers of the Chief Administrator do not extend to any matter assigned by law to the judiciary ; and
  • A Chief Justice may issue binding directions in writing to the Chief Administrator with respect to any matter within the Chief Administrator’s authority.

This was designed to ensure the institutional independence of the four federal courts from the other branches of the government, the executive and the legislative, while providing appropriate accountability for the funding provided by Parliament for the operation of the courts.

Ensuring the institutional independence of the four courts and enhancing accountability for the use of public funds.

Governance

Organizational Structure

CAS must continuously strive to improve the efficiency of its services by ensuring they are tailored to the specific needs of each court. As a result, we are in the process of implementing a new organizational structure which will enhance not only collaboration with and among the courts, but also our ability to respond promptly and effectively to emerging issues. In 2011–12, CAS embarked on a review of its organizational structure starting with the merger of the Judicial Services and Registry Services branches. This streamlining of core judicial and registry services will greatly improve CAS’ ability to provide better services to each of the four courts.

Organizational Structure

[Text Version]

Judicial and Registry Services

The Judicial and Registry Services Branch provides the four courts with appropriate and adequate support to enable them to execute their judicial functions effectively and efficiently.

Judicial Services support members of the four courts in discharging their judicial functions through executive legal officers, senior legal counsel, judicial administrators, law clerks, jurilinguists, judicial assistants, library personnel, court attendants and chauffeurs. The services include legal advice and research, revision, linguistic and terminological advice, translation, media contacts, administrative support and liaison with bar associations across Canada.

Registry Services are delivered across the country on behalf of the four courts. The registries process legal documents, provide information to litigants on court procedures, maintain court records, participate in court hearings as required by the judiciary, support and assist in the enforcement of court orders, and work closely with the Office of the four Chief Justices to ensure that matters are heard and decisions are rendered in a timely manner. Registry Services are offered in every province and territory through a network of permanent offices, and agreements with provincial and territorial partners.

Corporate Services

The Corporate Services Branch supports the full range of corporate operations and functions by managing activities and resources which apply across the organization.

The branch provides overall corporate leadership and infrastructure to integrate and deliver a variety of management frameworks and services in support of the operations, objectives, priorities and requirements of the four federal courts and CAS. The branch also provides key operational services which assist the four courts and their respective registries in carrying out their activities.

The services offered by the branch are: Finance and Materiel Management; Human Resources; Information Management and Information Technology; Security, Facilities and Administrative Services; and Project Management and Business Analysis.

CAS Senior Committees

“… ongoing consultation and collaboration with members of the courts…”

The governance of CAS is facilitated by a number of joint committees with the four courts as well as CAS senior committees. These committees help management make informed decisions by initiating discussions on key issues and helping determine the requirements of each court.

The Executive Committee (ExCom) is the organization’s most senior decision-making body. The ExCom is supported by the Senior Management Committee which plays an important role in all planning activities and also assists the decision-making process by reviewing operational and policy issues and making recommendations to ExCom.

In 2011–12, CAS revamped its senior committee structure, to better serve the interest of the four courts and to ensure ongoing consultation and collaboration with members of the courts regarding key strategic and operational issues. After consultations with the Chief Justices, CAS created the CAS Chief Justices’ Steering Committee and revived the three National Judges’ Committees on security, on information management and information technology, and on accommodations. These joint committees promote collaboration on decision-making, support the prudent and efficient management of resources, improve communications, and strengthen transparency and accountability.

Furthermore, to comply with the Treasury Board policy on Internal Audit and to bolster its governance structure, CAS also established the Departmental Audit Committee.

CAS Senior Committees

[Text Version]

CAS Chief Justices’ Steering Committee

This committee promotes cooperation and transparency between the Chief Justices and the Chief Administrator. It also assists CAS in fulfilling the mandate set out in the Courts Administration Service Act by addressing governance issues, policies and other significant matters affecting the conduct of the courts, as well as CAS’ budget allocations and operational priorities. Membership includes the Chief Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal, Federal Court, Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, and Tax Court of Canada, along with the Chief Administrator, who also serves as the Chair of the committee. The two Deputy Chief Administrators act as functional members of the committee.

National Judges’ Advisory Committees

CAS’ governance structure includes three subject matter judges’ advisory committees on: security, information management and information technology (IM/IT), and accommodations. These committees facilitate judicial involvement and cooperation in decisions pertaining to their respective areas. Sitting on each committee are judicial representatives from each of the four courts, supported by functional members from CAS. The committees submit their recommendations to the CAS Chief Justices’ Steering Committee for consideration and endorsement. The Chief Administrator chairs all three committees.

Executive Committee

The Executive Committee (ExCom) is CAS’ most senior decision-making body. ExCom supports the Chief Administrator in making informed and responsible decisions pertaining to the management and administration of the organization and to the services it provides to the four courts. The committee also serves as a forum for establishing strategic direction on a wide range of issues, identifying corporate needs and considering the potential outcome of decisions on the priorities and resources of the organization and the four courts. ExCom is chaired by the Chief Administrator, and membership includes the Deputy Chief Administrator of Judicial and Registry Services; the Deputy Chief Administrator of Corporate Services and Chief Financial Officer; the Director General of Human Resources and the Director of Corporate Secretariat.

Senior Management Committee

The Senior Management Committee (SMC) play an important role in all planning activities and also assists the decision-making process by reviewing operational and policy issues and making recommendations to ExCom. It is also responsible for the implementation of final decisions taken by ExCom. Membership comprises the executive cadre of the organization.

Departmental Audit Committee

The Departmental Audit Committee (DAC) provides the Chief Administrator with advice and recommendations regarding the sufficiency, quality and results of assurance on the adequacy and functioning of CAS’ risk management, control and governance frameworks and processes; including accountability and auditing systems. Its membership includes the Chief Administrator, who also chairs the committee, and two external members.

Focusing on Priorities

Maintain core judicial and registry services to the four courts.

Strengthen security for members of the courts, their users, and employees.

Modernize technology to support the smooth running of the courts and their related activities.

Maximize the use of our limited resources while addressing the long term financial sustainability of CAS.

Foster a positive and empowering work environment which addresses the needs of our employees.

Implement a new governance structure to enhance our ability to better serve the courts.

Improve communications to create a more engaged workforce and cohesive organizational culture.

Enhance planning and accountability to strengthen management practices, improve organizational performance and promote transparency.

II The Courts We Support

CAS’ service delivery model is centered on meeting the specific requirements of four separate and independent courts, each with distinct priorities, challenges, expec­tations and client needs.

The role of CAS is to provide administrative services to the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. The four courts served by CAS are superior courts of record. They were established by the Parliament of Canada pursuant to its authority under section 101 of the Constitution Act, 1867 “for the better administration of the Laws of Canada.”

In the exercise of their respective roles, each court makes decisions, interprets and establishes precedents, sets standards and raises questions of law on matters which affect the lives of Canadians and foreigners. The services provided by CAS permit individuals, companies, organizations and the provincial and federal governments to submit disputes and other matters to the courts, and enable the courts to hear and resolve the cases before them fairly, expeditiously, and as efficiently as possible.

Federal Court of Appeal

The Federal Court of Appeal is a national, bilingual, bijural, superior court of record, which has jurisdiction to hear appeals of judgments and orders, whether final or interlocutory, of the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada. It may also review decisions of certain federal tribunals pursuant to section 27 of the Federal Courts Act and hear appeals under other acts of Parliament.

Twelve judges headed by a Chief Justice carry out the functions and responsibilities assigned by law to the Federal Court of Appeal. In 2011–12, 471 proceedings were instituted or filed in the Federal Court of Appeal, and 1,588 court judgments, orders and directions were issued. In that same year, 334 cases were heard in 226 days in court.

Further information on the Federal Court of Appeal can be found at www.fca-caf.gc.ca.

Federal Court

The Federal Court is a national, bilingual, bijural, superior court of record, which hears and decides legal disputes arising in the federal domain. It is the successor to the Exchequer Court of Canada which was established in 1875. The jurisdiction of the Federal Court derives primarily from the Federal Courts Act, though over 100 other federal statutes also confer jurisdiction on the Court. The Federal Court has original, but not exclusive, jurisdiction over proceedings by and against the Crown (including Aboriginal law claims), and proceedings involving admiralty law and intellectual property law. It has exclusive jurisdiction to hear certain national security proceedings as well as applications for judicial review of the decisions of most federal boards, commissions and tribunals. This includes applications for judicial review of decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board.

Thirty-two judges, along with six supernumerary judges and six prothonotaries headed by a Chief Justice carry out the functions and responsibilities assigned by law to the Federal Court. In 2011–12, 31,527 proceedings were instituted or filed in the Federal Court, and 22,184 court judgments, orders, and directions were issued. In that same year 4,385 cases were heard in 2,961 days in court.

Further information on the Federal Court can be found at www.fct-cf.gc.ca.

Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada

The Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada is a national, bilingual, superior court of record, which hears appeals of court martial decisions. Courts martial are military courts established under the National Defence Act, which hear cases under the Code of Service Discipline.

Fifty-seven judges headed by a Chief Justice can be called upon to carry out the functions and responsibilities assigned by law to the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada. Court Martial Appeal Court judges also sit as judges in other courts. In 2011–12, six proceedings were instituted or filed in the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, and 24 court judgments, orders and directions were issued. In that same year, 8 cases were heard in 8 days in court.

Further information on the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada can be found at www.cmac-cacm.ca.

Tax Court of Canada

The Tax Court of Canada is a national, bilingual, bijural, superior court of record, which has exclusive original jurisdiction to hear appeals and references pursuant to fourteen acts of Parliament. Most of the appeals filed with the Court are on matters arising under: Income Tax Act, Part IX of the Excise Tax Act (GST), Part IV of the Employment Insurance Act, and Part I of the Canada Pension Plan.

The Chief Justice, the Associate Chief Justice, twenty judges, and supernumerary judges carry out the functions and responsibilities assigned by law to the Tax Court of Canada. In 2011–12, 4,750 appeals were instituted or filed in the Tax Court of Canada, and 9,637 court judgments, orders and directions were issued. In that same year, 984 cases were heard in 1,908 scheduled court sitting days.

Further information on the Tax Court of Canada can be found at www.tcc-cci.gc.ca.

Serving the Courts Across Canada

The four courts served by CAS are itinerant courts that sit and hear cases anywhere in Canada.

To provide access to registry services and to courtrooms across Canada, CAS has approximately 625 employees in permanent offices in 10 cities. Where CAS does not have local offices, court accommodations are provided through arrangements with provincial courts, commercial leases or in a variety of other facilities throughout Canada.

Serving the Courts Across Canada

[Text Version]

Permanent Offices:

  • Halifax
  • Fredericton
  • Quebec
  • Montreal
  • Ottawa
  • Toronto
  • Winnipeg
  • Calgary
  • Edmonton
  • Vancouver

Satellite Office:

  • London, Ontario

Provincial and Territorial Partners:

To provide access to registry services and ensure the availability of courtrooms across Canada, CAS has key agreements with the following provinces and territories:

  • Newfoundland and Labrador
  • Prince Edward Island
  • New Brunswick
  • Saskatchewan
  • Nunavut
  • Northwest Territories
  • Yukon

Project Spotlight

Customer Flow Management System

Project Location: Toronto, Ontario – Registry Office

The Customer Flow Management (CFM) system that was introduced in the Toronto public service area has been very successful in the first year of its use.

The CFM tracks valuable information about client waiting patterns and allows managers to adjust resources to maintain an adequate level of service.

In 2011–12, employees at the Toronto registry office served 19,226 clients and over 32,000 individual interactions, averaging over 1,600 clients per month and approximately 89 clients per day.

CAS is now considering the use of these systems in other regional offices across the country.

III Building Partnerships

Collaborative partnerships are essential to CAS’ national service delivery model.

In 2011–12, CAS continued to work with key partners to facilitate the successful delivery of judicial and registry services.

Provincial and Territorial Partnerships

The four federal courts are itinerant courts which sit across the country. CAS relies on strong partnerships and agreements with the provincial and territorial governments of Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and Yukon, to ensure registry services and access to courtrooms across Canada.

International Partnerships

For years now, CAS has gained international recognition as a leader in the provision of judicial and registry services and has also enjoyed excellent working relations with many countries. Many foreign delegations come to Canada to observe various facets of CAS’ operations and to learn about CAS’ judicial and registry services delivery model.

In 2011–12, CAS was invited by Federal Judicial Affairs Canada, to participate in the Judicial Systems Improvement for Commerce and Economy Project. This initiative involved the participation of four CAS employees providing training and technical assistance to Peru, Ghana and Jamaica on records management, client service competencies of registrars and case-flow management. These countries also sent delegations to CAS’ Toronto office to learn about best practices in Canadian court administration.

Other Important Collaboration

The services provided by CAS to the four courts include participation on, and/or the provision of support to many committees such as the:

  • Federal Courts Rules Committee;
  • Tax Court Rules Committee;
  • Canadian Bar Association Liaison Committees;
  • Indigenous Bar Association – Aboriginal Law Bar Liaison Committee;
  • Immigration and Refugee Law Bar Committee;
  • Maritime Law Bar Liaison Committee;
  • Intellectual Property Law Bar Liaison Committee; and
  • Montreal Bar Liaison Committee.

Project Spotlight

Indigenous Bar Association – Aboriginal Law Bar Liaison Committee

Over the past few years, CAS has provided support to the Federal Court in the Bench and Bar Liaison initiative to develop practice guidelines seeking to improve the administration of justice in aboriginal proceedings before the Court.

In 2011–12, major accomplishment has been made in regards of dealing with aboriginal matters that come before the court, including court practice issues involving Elders’ testimony (oral history testimony) and the use of alternate dispute resolution. The purpose of the practice guidelines is to improve the litigation processes involving aboriginal litigants and to ensure timely and fair access to the Federal Court, a priority for CAS.

Rules committees

Rules committees are the bodies that consider and approve changes to courts rules. These committees are extremely important as they have a direct impact on judicial and registry services provided by CAS.

The membership of the Federal Courts Rules Committee includes representatives of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Canadian Bar Association, the Department of Justice, the academic community and CAS Chief Administrator.

The membership of the Tax Court of Canada Rules Committee includes representatives of the TCC, of the Attorney General of Canada, of the Canadian Bar Association and CAS’ Chief Administrator.

In 2011–12, the Federal Courts Rules Committee decided that a global review of the rules should be conducted. As a result, a subcommittee on global review has been established. CAS Judicial and Registry Services branch played an important role by providing support to the Rules Committee and its subcommittees.

Canadian Bar Association Liaison Committees

In 2011–12, CAS continued to provide support to the Canadian Bar Association Liaison Committees. There is one Liaison Committee with the Federal Court of Appeal/Federal Court and another with the Tax Court of Canada. These committees give members of the Canadian Bar Association and the Department of Justice a forum to exchange on common issues and discuss proposed changes to the litigation process in certain areas. While the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada sit on the Canadian Bar Association Liaison Committees, these committees are not court committees. Discussion papers may be posted on the Bar’s website.

IV The Year in Brief

Fostering an environment which welcomes change and improving the quality and efficiency of our judicial and registry services

Maintaining core judicial and registry services to the four courts

CAS must, first and foremost, ensure that the four courts are provided with core judicial and registry services. During 2011–12, CAS’ executive legal officers, senior legal counsels and law clerks provided ongoing legal advice and support to the members of the four courts. As well, judicial administrators, judicial assistants, jurilinguists, and library personnel provided the members of the courts with ongoing professional support.

Some changes worth highlighting this year pertain to the new research program set up at the Federal Court of Appeal to improve the quality of the law clerks’ research activities and to provide the Court with a more complete structure of institutional memory. Library Services employees continued the implementation of CAS’ Collection Development Policy, with on-going input from members of the courts and other CAS employees. The objective of the policy is to rationalize collections and acquisitions across the country and ensure proper resource allocation for library support. As well, procedures and reference material for judicial assistants have been standardized and improved to provide better services to the courts.

In every province and territory, the Registries of the four courts process court documents, provide information to litigants, maintain court records, support the members of the courts during and after court hearings, and assist the courts and parties with the enforcement of court orders. The registries of each court also continued to review, streamline and document all registry processes to provide consistent and improved registry services across the country and to facilitate knowledge transfer and employee training. Registry, Project Management and IT employees continued to develop a new Digital Audio Recording System to provide members of the courts with audio recording of court hearings. In addition, Registry employees continued to support the current legacy Court and Registry Management System, while documenting workflows and user requirements necessary for the development of a new system that will eventually provide each court with complete electronic files.

Statistics on the workload of CAS employees in the registries of each court in the National Capital Region and in our Regional offices can be found in Part V of this document.

Strengthening Security

It is of the utmost importance to provide secure facilities for the courts and ensures the safety and security of the members of the courts, users of the courts and all CAS employees across Canada. Over the past year, as part of the CAS National Security Strategy, and with Treasury Board Program Integrity resources, some enhancements were implemented, which improved the organization’s ability to address security risks.

The first step was to revitalize the security team by attracting and retaining experienced and talented employees with specialized backgrounds. The impact on the quality of the services offered to members of the courts was almost immediate and greatly improves the organization’s capacity to meet the specific need of the four courts, CAS and the public it serves.

In the same period, CAS developed a security governance framework to facilitate decision making in consultation with members of the courts. A comprehensive security strategy, encompassing various programs such as hearing risk management and court security, was also defined. The strategy and related programs are to be gradually implemented, in consultation with members of the courts, to ensure a consistent approach that they support.

To support the four courts and ensure that all of their members are informed about security measures, CAS actively participated in a specifically tailored Judicial Security Seminar. For that purpose, CAS developed and distributed a Judicial Security Handbook, which contains practical safety tips and recommendations. As well, CAS raised security awareness generally by providing a mandatory security course for all new employees, and through internal communications to remind all employees of their security-related roles and responsibilities.

The relocation, in 2011–12, of CAS’ corporate functions to 90 Sparks Street in Ottawa, site of the Federal Court of Appeal, Federal Court and Court Martial Appeal Court, ensures faster and better communication with members of the Courts and CAS employees, and offers an improved service delivery model for the provision of court security.

The consolidation of CAS services should enable the organization, as the building’s prime tenant, to address security requirements within the building in a holistic fashion, coordinating prevention, detection and response strategies with the other stakeholders. The resulting benefits include common standards and improved capacity for dealing with fire safety and emergency response.

Project Spotlight

Improvements to Registry Client Service Areas

Registry Services 90 Sparks Street, Ottawa, Ontario

Federal Court of Appeal Federal Court Court Appeal Martial Court of Canada

Registry Services 200 Kent Street, Ottawa, Ontario

Tax Court of Canada

The new client service areas in Ottawa improved the efficiency of registry services through a remodeled environment that provides a more secure environment, new accessibility features and file consultation rooms for the public and litigants.

Modernizing Technology

CAS continued to progress with its digital transformation agenda to prepare for the introduction of effective, efficient and modern electronic courtrooms. The focus for 2011–12 was mainly on upgrading the technological infrastructure and preparing the move to the new data centre planned for the fall 2012–13, managing its information technology risks, and maintaining legacy systems. Amongst the significant progress achieved was the upgrading of key network components, improvements of the network bandwidth for the regions; and introduction of new videoconferencing equipment.

Plans are now well underway for the phased introduction of a new Digital Audio Recording System (DARS). Amongst its many benefits, DARS will allow members of the courts to access recordings of proceedings in digital format, enable clarification of evidence using audio playback, and reduce the transcript costs.

CAS continued to move towards a fully integrated Court and Registry Management System (CRMS). The CRMS is a key initiative designed to manage court related documents and processes electronically. CRMS will make possible the efficient receipt, processing, storage and retrieval of electronic court documents and will automate court and registry workflow processes and procedures.

Various aspects of information technology services to members of the courts and CAS employees were significantly improved. Some of the key elements include better use of technical resources, increased capacity through the addition of an e-courtroom technical position, a new dedicated 1-800 service desk number, and extended support hours. In addition, IT security awareness was a main theme in the Judicial Security Seminar.

Finally, during the reporting period, the four Courts and CAS were excluded from the Shared Services Canada Initiative to protect the judicial independence of the courts and the confidentiality of their information.

Project Spotlight

New Online Application Tool for Law Clerks

Project Location: National Capital Region

Every year, CAS hires law clerks to support members of the courts. In 2011–12, 60 law clerks were hired to help prepare case summaries, research questions of law and draft detailed memoranda on facts and legal issues. Recent graduates of Canadian law schools are invited to apply for positions as law clerks to judges of the courts. Notices regarding the law clerk programs for the different courts are distributed in Canadian law schools. This annual hiring process generates many applications.

To streamline this process and reduce the paper burden on both CAS and the applicants, CAS initiated plans to implement an online application tool for the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court law clerks. This will facilitate improvements in the management of the application and interview process and will provide a secure online solution to both CAS and the potential candidates. Further, to reduce their travel related expenditures and environmental footprint, members of the Courts made good use of video conferencing and existing technology such as Skype to conduct interviews and facilitate meetings with students.

Maximizing the use of our Limited Resources

For several years, CAS has faced significant financial challenges, which have affected its capacity to deliver on its programs and to move forward on a variety of initiatives. In 2011–12, the financial situation remained difficult and continued to pose risks to the organization’s ability to fulfill its mandate. To promptly address this problem, management, in consultation with the four Chief Justices, rigorously evaluated its risk mitigation strategies and continuously monitored its expenses. It should also be noted that a considerable amount of effort was devoted to the implementation of the Deficit Reduction Action Plan which will result in an additional budget reduction of $1 million for the organization.

To maximize the use of its limited resources during the reporting period, CAS continued to base its investment decisions on a solid understanding of the risks and pressures facing the organization. A five-year Investment Plan was developed to ensure that resources are allocated to key priority areas addressing the needs of the courts and essential CAS requirements.

Furthermore, in 2011–12, CAS took some steps to ensure its long-term financial viability by developing options for a more appropriate, stable and sustainable funding model. In the coming year, CAS will continue to work collaboratively with the four courts, the Department of Justice and central agencies to meet that objective.

Fostering a Positive and Empowering Work Environment

CAS must continually adapt to change and respond to the evolving requirements of the four courts it serves. It must do so while addressing internal business-driven needs and adapting to external influences, such as government-wide priorities. To meet these challenges, CAS relies on a professional workforce, proficient in dealings with members of the courts and the public, conscientious in their work, rich in talent and eager to learn. In 2011–12, CAS focused its staffing strategy on maintaining this level of professionalism and ensuring the availability of adequate human resources to support the courts and members of the courts.

On the basis of a thorough analysis of the learning needs identified by employees and management, and keeping in mind the limited resources available, CAS continued to focus on operational training to further enhance employee knowledge and to expand their skill sets. These activities were complemented by essential training on key initiatives such as diversity, occupational health and safety, the harassment-free workplace, mental health, linguistic skills and security awareness.

A talent management approach was initiated to help managers provide better learning and development opportunities for employees. Where operationally feasible, management also supported alternative work arrangements and left options in line with the new guide on alternative work arrangements. This is helping the organization retain and motivate high-performing and experienced employees, by increasing their job satisfaction and ability to handle stress.

The overall results of the Public Service Employee Survey (PSES) were more positive for CAS in 2011 than in 2008. The organization showed some significant progress in three areas: employees’ ability to manage their workloads, employee loyalty and confidence in management decisions. CAS is heading in the right direction and will continue to address other concerns raised by employees.

As part of this commitment, CAS developed a mentoring program, in partnership with Infrastructure Canada. This will promote learning through the development and exchange of knowledge and skills between mentors and mentees. It will support short, medium and long term career planning, and foster development of leadership skills.

Improving Communications

CAS took different steps to improve its communication strategy and systems, with the ultimate objective of optimizing the effectiveness of communication between management, employees and members of the courts.

In 2011–12, CAS improved its internal communication tools by streamlining messages through the implementation of a new directive framing the way CAS managers and executives disseminate information to employees and members of the courts. The internal newsletter has been totally revamped and improved to better address information needs. This improved newsletter presents more informative, relevant and timely articles in a new, more structured and appealing format. Many positive comments were received from both members of the courts and CAS employees.

Furthermore, CAS increased its use of technology including video conferencing, Skype and web postings to allow for seamless communication between management and employees. The uses of these technologies also provided CAS with various means to continue to engage its employees in cost-effective ways.

Throughout the year, another key focus was to increase communications with central agencies to keep them abreast of the challenges faced by the organization and to find long-term solutions to various chronic issues.

Strengthening Planning and Accountability

Planning, monitoring and reporting requirements are essential parts of CAS’ governance regime. These activities are vital to managing effectively, clearly communicating the organization’s role and priorities, monitoring progress, supporting resource allocation decisions and enhancing accountability.

This past year, although CAS had to “catch-up” on various planning and reporting requirements, the organization made some significant progress in meeting its obligations. CAS focused on the establishment and implementation of the Departmental Audit Committee and the appointment of a Chief Audit Executive; the policy on Internal Control; Quarterly Financial Reports; Future-Oriented Financial Statements; the Greening of Government Operations; Investment Planning and Project Management; Risk Management; as well as other statutory reporting requirements in the areas of strategic planning, official languages, human resources, financial management and procurement.

CAS also continued to employ innovative and informed strategies to proactively identify, assess, monitor and address its key risks exposure. The nature of its business, the unique characteristics of the Canadian judicial system, its governance structure and its unique clientele, are inherent factors which pose many challenges and risks to the effective management of CAS’ priorities.

To facilitate the implementation of new technology, CAS strengthened its project management capacity with the introduction of a new Enterprise Project Management Office (EPMO). The EPMO objective is to improve project oversight, provide for better assistance and direction to project leaders, and ensure relevant guidance for all business analysis activities.

Finally, CAS greatly improved its management practices in the various areas of management measured by the Treasury Board Secretariat through the Management Accountability Framework. This clearly demonstrates a cultural shift with a clear focus on results and the continuous improvement of management practices.

Value and Ethics

CAS’ ethical standards are based on five core values: transparency, respect, innovation, wellness and excellence. These core values guide employees and management in their work and their professional conduct. By closely following these values CAS fosters a professional work environment free of harassment, and maintains and enhances public confidence in the integrity of the organization.

With the introduction of the new Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector, in 2012–13, CAS will take the opportunity to engage employees across the organization to establish a new code of conduct applicable to its unique mandate and work environment while also ensuring consistency with the Public Sector Code.

V Courts Statistics

The following statistics provide a record of the workload handled by the employees of the Judicial and Registry Services Branch in support of the four federal courts.

Federal Court of Appeal 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Proceedings Instituted or Filed 471 527 542
Court Judgments, Orders and Directions Processed by the Registry 1,588 1,674 1,272
Files prepared for hearing and heard in Court 334 370 356
Days in Court 226 246 215
Recorded Entries 20,566 20,632 20,506
Total Dispositions 511 565 629
Active Proceedings as of March 31, 2012 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Appeals from Federal Court (Final Judgment) 137 131 164
Appeals from Federal Court (Interlocutory Judgment) 46 35 35
Appeals from Tax Court of Canada 96 145 118
Applications for Judicial Review 65 75 102
Others 16 17 28
Total 360 403 447
Status 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Not perfected 234 258 294
Perfected 28 37 39
Consolidated 20 22 14
Reserved 24 18 15
Scheduled for hearing 36 46 72
Stayed 18 22 13
Total 360 403 447

 

Federal Court 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Proceedings Instituted or Filed 31,527 30,786 33,866
General Proceedings and Immigration 12,379 9,766 8,692
Income Tax Act certificates 10,737 12,333 15,630
Excise Tax Act certificates 7,789 8,147 9,077
Other instruments and certificates 622 540 467
Court Judgments, Orders and Directions Processed by the Registry 22,184 21,205 19,866
Files prepared for hearing and heard in Court 4,385 4,215 4,407
Days in Court 2,961 2,996 3,019
Recorded Entries 254,147 238,525 233,038
Total Dispositions – General Proceedings and Immigration 10,555 9,362 8,821
Active Proceedings as of March 31, 2012 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Aboriginal 240 210 224
Other appeals provided for by law 142 120 109
Admiralty 234 270 284
Intellectual property 548 626 677
Immigration 4,705 2,895 2,565
Crown 291 315 305
Judicial Review 747 702 668
Patented Medicines Regulations 74 71 70
Total 6,981 5,209 4,902
Status 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Not perfected 4,650 3,511 3,303
Perfected 759 570 696
Consolidated 37 61 30
Reserved 207 144 127
Scheduled for hearing 636 481 422
Stayed 692 442 324
Total 6,981 5,209 4,902

 

Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Proceedings Instituted or Filed 6 5 10

Court Judgments, Orders and Directions Processed by the Registry

24 33 54
Files prepared for hearing and heard in Court 8 3 10
Days in Court 8 2 10
Recorded Entries 260 311 534
Total Dispositions 5 10 10
Active Proceedings as of March 31, 2012 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Application for review of a direction 0 0 0
Notice of Appeal 5 4 11
Application for review of an undertaking 0 0 0
Notice of motion commencing an appeal 0 0 0
Total 5 4 11
Status 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Not perfected 2 1 5
Perfected 1 1 0
Consolidated 0 0 0
Reserved 2 0 5
Scheduled for hearing 0 2 1
Stayed 0 0 0
Total 5 4 11

 

Tax Court of Canada 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Proceedings Instituted or Filed 4,750 4,222 4,444
Court Judgments, Orders and Directions Processed by the Registry 9,637 11,793 10,333
Files prepared for hearing and heard in Court 984 1,182 1,175
Days in Court* 1,908 2,126 2,066
Recorded Entries 147,484 158,102 145,614
Total Dispositions 4,859 4,998 4,373
Active Proceedings as of March 31, 2012 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Goods and Services Tax 1,299 1,145 1,014
Income Tax 5,482 5,616 6,152
Employment Insurance and Canada Pension Plan 224 291 593
Others 157 167 277
Total 7,162 7,219 8,036
Status 2011–2012 2010–2011 2009–2010
Not perfected 1,432 789 815
Perfected 1,450 2,355 2,772
Reserved 95 149 160
Awaiting timetable 150 107 212
Scheduled for hearing 1,150 764 904
Specially Managed Cases 1,454 1,724 1,811
Awaiting another decision 1,431 1,331 1,362
Total 7,162 7,219 8,036
* For the Tax Court of Canada “Days in Court” is defined as the number of court sitting days scheduled.

 

VI Financial Highlights

Statement of Management Responsibility Including Internal Control Over Financial Reporting

Responsibility for the integrity and objectivity of the accompanying financial statements for the year ended March 31, 2012, and all information contained in these statements rests with the management of the Courts Administration Service. These financial statements have been prepared by management using the Government’s accounting policies, which are based on Canadian public sector accounting standards.

Management is responsible for the integrity and objectivity of the information in these financial statements. Some of the information in the financial statements is based on management’s best estimates and judgment, and gives due consideration to materiality. To fulfill its accounting and reporting responsibilities, management maintains a set of accounts that provides a centralized record of the Courts Administration Service’s financial transactions. Financial information submitted in the preparation of the Public Accounts of Canada, and included in the Courts Administration Service’s Departmental Performance Report, is consistent with these financial statements

Management is also responsible for maintaining an effective system of internal control over financial reporting (ICFR) designed to provide reasonable assurance that financial information is reliable, that assets are safeguarded and that transactions are properly authorized and recorded in accordance with the Financial Administration Act and other applicable legislation, regulations, authorities and policies.

Management seeks to ensure the objectivity and integrity of data in its financial statements through careful selection, training, and development of qualified employees; through organizational arrangements that provide appropriate divisions of responsibility; through communication programs aimed at ensuring that regulations, policies, standards, and managerial authorities are understood throughout the Courts Administration Service and through conducting an annual risk-based assessment of the effectiveness of the system of ICFR.

The system of ICFR is designed to mitigate risks to a reasonable level based on an ongoing process to identify key risks, to assess effectiveness of associated key controls, and to make any necessary adjustments.

A risk-based assessment of the system of ICFR for the year ended March 31, 2012 was completed in accordance with the Treasury Board Policy on Internal Control and the results and action plans are summarized in the annex.

The effectiveness and adequacy of the Courts Administration Service’s system of internal control is reviewed by the work of the Chief Audit Executive, who conducts periodic audits of different areas of the Courts Administration Service’s operations, and by the Departmental Audit Committee, which oversees management’s responsibilities for maintaining adequate control systems and the quality of financial reporting, and which recommends the financial statements to the Deputy Head of the Courts Administration Service.

The financial statements of the Courts Administration Service have not been audited.


Daniel Gosselin, FCPA, FCA
Deputy Head
Chief Administrator
Ottawa, Ontario
August 30, 2012


Francine Côté, CPA, CA, CISA
Chief Financial Officer
Deputy Chief Administrator, Corporate Services

Statement of Financial Position (Unaudited)

As at March 31
(in thousands of dollars)

Liabilities

    Restated
(Note 12)*
  2012 2011
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities (Note 4)* 4,900 3,247
Vacation pay and compensatory leave 2,158 1,820
Deposit accounts (Note 5)* 6,529 5,949
Employee future benefits (Note 6)* 3,359 8,681
Total liabilities 16,946 19,697

Assets

    Restated
(Note 12)*
  2012 2011
Financial assets    
Due from the Consolidated Revenue Fund 9,447 7,640
Accounts receivable and employee advances (Note 7)* 1,989 1,590
Total gross financial assets 11,436 9,230
Financial assets held on behalf of Government    
Accounts receivable and employee advances (Note 7)* (1,614) (1,286)
Total net financial assets 9,822 7,944
Departmental net debt 7,124 11,753
Non-financial assets    
Prepaid expenses – 4
Tangible capital assets (Note 8)* 6,516 4,519
Total non-financial assets 6,516 4,523
     
Departmental net financial position (608) (7,230)

* The accompanying notes form an integral part of the Financial Statements which can be found at: http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/CAS/DPR-RMR_eng/DPR-RMR-2011-2012-detail_eng

Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position (Unaudited)

For the year ended March 31
(in thousands of dollars)

Expenses

  Planned Results   Restated
(Note 12)*
  2012 2012 2011
Judicial services 40,734 42,105 40,104
Registry services 34,461 32,921 32,744
Internal services 20,703 22,182 20,079
Expenses incurred on behalf of Government – (14) (2)
Total Expenses 95,898 97,194 92,925

Revenues

  Planned Results   Restated
(Note 12)*
  2012 2012 2011
Fines 5,177 1,066 5,060
Filing fees 1,423 1,644 1,484
Employment Insurance Operating Account cost recoveries (Note 2(d))* 1,995 1,576 1,233
Miscellaneous 212 109 200
Revenues earned on behalf of Government (8,807) (4,388) (7,974)
Total Revenues – 7 3
       
Net cost of operations before government funding and transfers 95,898 97,187 92,922

Government funding and transfers

  Planned Results   Restated
(Note 12)*
  2012 2012 2011
Net cash provided by Government   71,021 66,719
Change in due from Consolidated Revenue Fund   1,807 (2,863)
Services provided without charge by other government departments (Note 10)*   30,981 28,550
Net cost of operations after government funding and transfers   (6,622) 516
Departmental net financial position – Beginning of year   (7,230) (6,714)
Departmental net financial position – End of year   (608) (7,230)

* The accompanying notes form an integral part of the Financial Statements which can be found at: http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/CAS/DPR-RMR_eng/DPR-RMR-2011-2012-detail_eng

Statement of Financial Position

Liabilities:

CAS’ total liabilities as at March 31, 2012 were $16,946 thousand ($19,697 thousand as at March 31, 2011).

  • Accounts payable and accrued liabilities: The balance as at March 31, 2012 was $4,900 thousand ($3,247 thousand as at March 31, 2011). The increase of $1,653 thousand is mainly due to increases in accounts payable to external parties.
  • Vacation pay and compensatory leave: The balance as at March 31, 2012 was $2,158 thousand ($1,820 thousand as at March 31, 2011). Vacation pay and compensatory leave has steadily increased over the past few years.
  • Deposit accounts: The balance as at March 31, 2012 was $6,529 thousand ($5,949 thousand as at March 31, 2011). Because they reflect many separate decisions of the Courts, deposits cannot be projected and the balance in the deposit accounts varies significantly from year to year.
  • Employee future benefits: The balance as at March 31, 2012 was $3,359 thousand ($8,681 thousand as at March 31, 2011). In 2011–12, significant changes were made to the employee severance pay program.

Assets:

Total assets signify the ability of CAS to provide future services to the four Federal courts and thereby to ensure access to justice for Canadians. Total assets as at March 31, 2012 were $16,338 thousand ($12,467 thousand as at March 31, 2011).

  • Gross financial assets: Gross financial assets increased to $11,436 thousand in 2011–12 from $9,230 thousand in 2010–11. This was mainly due to an increase in the amount Due from the Consolidated Revenue Fund (CRF). This amount represents the net amount of cash that CAS is entitled to withdraw from the CRF without generating additional charges against its authorities.
  • Financial assets held on behalf of Government: Financial assets held on behalf of Government increased to $1,614 thousand as at March 31, 2012 from $1,286 thousand as at March 31, 2011. These consist primarily of accounts receivable from another governmental organization; an example is the charging to HRSDC of the costs of administering EI cases in the courts. The Deputy Head is required to maintain accounting controls over these transactions but has no authority regarding their disposition.
  • Net financial assets: CAS’ total net financial assets as at March 31, 2012 were $9,822 thousand ($7,944 thousand as at March 31, 2011). This amount represents gross financial assets less financial assets held on behalf of Government.
  • Non-financial assets: Total non-financial assets at March 31, 2012 were $6,516 thousand ($4,523 thousand as at March 31, 2011). Non-financial assets consist of the tangible capital assets that are essential for the successful delivery of services required by the courts. Computer hardware and software (including assets under construction) totaled 46% of non-financial assets in 2011–12, while leasehold improvements (including assets under construction) accounted for 50%. Combined, these categories currently account for 96% of CAS tangible capital assets.

    Re-investment in capital assets is crucial for maintaining secure modern facilities, updating technological infrastructure and information systems, and maintaining a reliable fleet of vehicles. In terms of the acquisition of tangible capital assets, in 2011–12 CAS spent $2,623 thousand, an important increase from $643 thousand in 2010–11. Of this amount, $1,220 thousand (47%) related to computer hardware and $809 thousand (31%) to leasehold improvements, including associated assets under construction. The latter largely reflected construction costs for the data centre, mail room and relocation of corporate functions to the TDM Building. Other acquisitions included computer software, motor vehicles, furniture and fixtures, computer software and machinery and equipment.

Net Debt:

CAS’ net debt (liabilities less total net financial assets) was $7,124 thousand as at March 31, 2012, a decrease from $11,753 thousand as at March 31, 2011. The net debt indicator provides a measure of the future authorities required to pay for past transactions and events. The fluctuations in net debt are presented in the Statement of Change in Departmental Net Debt.

Net Financial Position:

This represents the net resources (financial and non-financial) that will be used to provide future services to the courts and thereby to benefit Canadians. The Net Financial Position of CAS consists of Non-Financial Assets less Net Debt.

As at March 31, 2012, CAS’ net financial position was ($608) thousand, compared to ($7,230) thousand as at March 31, 2011. The change is mainly due to a decrease in total liabilities and an increase in tangible capital assets.

Statement of Operations and Departmental Net Financial Position

Expenses:

Net expenses were $97,194 thousand in 2011–12 ($92,925 thousand in 2010–11). The largest components in the increase of $4,269 thousand (5%) were increases of $1,802 thousand in salaries and employee benefits and $1,766 in accommodations.

Salaries and employee benefits: Over half of CAS’ total expenses consist of salaries and employee benefits. These costs increased by $1,802 thousand (3%) to $53,560 thousand in 2011–12 compared to $51,758 thousand in 2010–11 (and $49,755 thousand in 2009–10). The most recent increase is primarily the result of changes in the severance pay program and wage increases in newly signed collective bargaining agreements.

Operating: CAS’ operating costs increased by $2,467 thousand (6%) to $43,634 thousand in 2011–12 compared to $41,167 in 2010–11 and $49,755 in 2009–10. The increase is mainly attributable to increases of $1,766 thousand in accommodations and $633 thousand in professional and special services.

Revenues:

Gross revenues were $4,395 thousand in 2011–12 ($7,977 thousand in 2010–11). Gross revenues consist largely of revenues earned on behalf of Government. Such revenues are non-respendable, meaning they cannot be used by CAS, and are deposited directly into the CRF.

Revenues earned on behalf of Government were $4,388 thousand in 2011–12 ($7,974 thousand in 2010–11). One major source of such revenues is fines and filing fees collected pursuant to the legislation and rules governing the courts. Other revenues are generated by charges for photocopies of court documents; in 2011–12, however, sales, printing and distribution of copies of judgments and orders were discontinued as electronic copies were made available on-line, free of charge. Another source of revenue earned on behalf of government is charges to Human Resources and Skills Development Canada (HRSDC) for the costs associated with the administration of Employment Insurance (EI) cases in the courts.

CAS’ net revenues were $7 thousand in 2011–12 ($3 thousand in 2010–11). This reflects a small amount of respendable revenue from sale of Crown assets.

Risks and Uncertainties

Funding

During 2011–12, the financial situation of CAS remained difficult and continued to be an important source of risks to the organization’s ability to fulfill its mandate.

For some years, CAS had lacked the permanent funding necessary to enable the organization to fully meet its commitments and address major program integrity issues. Budget 2011 addressed part of this need, providing CAS with approximately $3 million per year for program integrity measures. Meanwhile, however, government cost containment measures froze appropriations, requiring departments to absorb the cost of negotiated salary increases, an important consideration given the large proportion of the CAS budget devoted to salaries.

A loan in the amount of $2,750 thousand, to be repaid over five years, was provided by Treasury Board in 2011–12 and enabled CAS to construct a new data centre, address IT rust-out, and consolidate corporate functions in the TDM Building.

Funding restraints severely limited the resources available for strategic projects needed to address critical risk areas and allow the organization to become more effective and efficient in its delivery of services to the judiciary and Canadians. CAS will continue to work with Central Agencies to identify solutions to this longstanding problem.

Risk Management

Given the challenges of managing financial and other pressures, CAS put emphasis during 2011–12 on developing its risk assessment and risk management capacity.

Certain elements of court management are a responsibility of the judiciary and impose on CAS requirements that are beyond its control. A majority of the non-salary operating expenses incurred by CAS are contracted costs for non-discretionary services supporting the judicial process and court hearings. These costs include translation, court reporters, transcripts, and security services, and they are mostly driven by the number, type and duration of hearings conducted in any given year. A risk management strategy to monitor these costs and manage their fluctuation and related impacts on other key areas was further developed during the year.

Another example where CAS made progress in developing new approaches to risk was the provision of security services for the courts and their users. This area remains a key concern, and consequently the limited resources available must be applied efficiently and effectively to anticipate and avoid security risks, as well as to deal with those that do materialize.

Likewise, maintaining an efficient and secure IM/IT infrastructure to support the operations of the courts and CAS and to protect the integrity of court information was another area where tangible progress was made in overcoming rust-out and addressing risks and problems. Much further work in this area will be needed in coming years to support the growing needs of the courts and registries.

Further financial details are provided in the “Financial Statement Discussion Analysis” available online at: http://cas-ncr-nter03.cas-satj.gc.ca/portal/page/portal/CAS/DPR-RMR_eng/fsda-caef-2011-2012_eng

Appendix 1 – Acronyms

ARLU – Annual Reference Level Update

CA – Chief Administrator

CAE – Chief Audit Executive

CAS – Courts Administration Service

CFM – Customer Flow Management

CJSC – Chief Justices’ Steering Committee

CRMS – Court and Registry Management System

CRP – Corporate Risk Profile

DCA – Deputy Chief Administrator

DAC – Departmental Audit Committee

DARS – Digital Audio Recording System

DOJ – Department of Justice

DRAP – Deficit Reduction Action Plan

EPMO – Enterprise Project Management Office

ExCom – Executive Committee

FJAC – Federal Judicial Affairs Canada

ICFR – Internal Control over Financial Reporting

IM/IT – Information Management and Information Technology

IPC – Investment Planning Committee

IT – Information Technology

GST – Goods and Services Tax

PIC – Policy on Internal Control

PSES – Public Service Employee Survey

PWGSC – Public Works and Government Services Canada

RDG – Regional Directors General

RBAP – Risk-Based Audit Plan

SMC – Senior Management Committee

TBS – Treasury Board Secretariat’s

TDM – Thomas D’Arcy McGee Building

Appendix 2 – Glossary

Term Definition
Bijural Applies to Canada’s two systems of law: the common law and the civil law.
Consolidated When different cases that have the same parties or have certain elements in common are heard together.
Days in court Each court sitting day where a registrar attends in person or by teleconference.
Dispositions Proceedings concluded by way of judgment, discontinuance or other documents.
Files prepared for hearing and heard by the court Number of appeals, trials, judicial reviews, motions, teleconferences & meetings heard by the court.
Judgments Decisions of the court.
Not Perfected When the parties have not yet done everything required of them, according to the rules or orders of the court, in order for the case to be ready to be scheduled for a hearing.
Order Decision rendered by the courts.
Perfected When the parties have done everything required of them, according to the rules or orders of the court, in order for the case to be ready to be scheduled for a hearing.
Proceedings A matter or cause before the court which includes appeals, actions, applications, applications for leave & judicial review and where provided for by federal statutes, administrative proceedings such as the ones instituted by the filing of certificates, decisions or orders of federal boards, commissions or other tribunals in the registry of the Federal Courts for the purpose of enforcement.
Prothonotaries They are appointed under the Federal Courts Act (s. 12). They are full judicial officers and exercise many of the powers and functions of Federal Court judges. Their authority includes mediation, case management, practice motions (including those that may result in a final disposition of the case, regardless of the amount in issue), as well as trials of actions in which up to $50,000 is claimed (see Rules 50, 382, and 383 to 387 of the Federal Courts Rules).
Recorded entries The number of individual records made in the respective case management automation systems that describe the various documents filed and received and events that have taken place.
Reserved Decision that is not rendered immediately after a case has been heard or argued.
Scheduled for hearing Proceedings in which a hearing on the merits has been scheduled.
Stayed When a case is placed “on hold”. For example, where another related decision is to be made before the case can be continued.

Contact Us

National Capital Region Offices

Courtrooms and Registry Operations of the Federal Court of Appeal, Federal Court and Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
Thomas D’Arcy McGee Building
90 Sparks Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0H9
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 613-996-6795
FC: 613-992-4238
Fax:
FCA/CMAC: 613-952-7226
FC (Non-Immigration): 613-952-3653
FC (Immigration): 613-947-2141
TDD: 613-995-4640
Toll free numbers
FCA: 1-800-565-0541
FC: 1-800-663-2096
CMAC: 1-800-665-3329

Registry and courtrooms of the Tax Court of Canada
Centennial Towers
200 Kent Street
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0M1
Telephone: 613-992-0901
Fax: 613-957-9034
TTY: 613-943-0946
Toll free number
TCC: 1-800-927-5499

Regional and Local Offices

Whitehorse, YT
Andrew A. Phillipsen Law Centre
PO Box 2703 2134
Second Avenue
Y1A 5H6
Telephone: 867-667-5441
Fax: 867-393-6212

Yellowknife, NT
The Court House
P.O. Box 1320
4905 – 49th Street
X1A 2L9
Telephone: 867-873-2044
Fax: 867-873-0291

Iqaluit, NU
Justice Building (Building #510)
P.O. Box 297
Iqaluit, Nunavut
X0A 0H0
Telephone: 867-975-6100
Fax: 867-975-6550

Vancouver, BC
Pacific Centre
P.O. Box 10065
300 – 701 West Georgia Street
V7Y 1B6
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 604-666-2055
FC: 604-666-3232
FCA/FC Fax: 604-666-8181
TCC: 604-666-7987
TCC Fax: 604-666-7967
TTY: 604-666-9228

Edmonton, AB
Scotia Place, Tower 1, Suite 530
P.O. Box 51
10060 Jasper Avenue
T5J 3R8
Telephone: FCA/CMAC
780-495-2502
FC: 780-495-4651
TCC: 780-495-2513
Fax: 780-495-4681
TTY: 780-495-2428

Calgary, AB
635 Eighth Avenue S.W.
3rd Floor
T2P 3M3
Telephone: FCA/CMAC
403-292-5555
FC: 403-292-5920
TCC: 403-292-5556
Fax: 403-292-5329
TTY: 403-292-5879

Regina, SK
The Court House
2425 Victoria Avenue
S4P 3V7
Telephone: 306-780-5268
Fax: 306-787-7217

Saskatoon, SK
The Court House
520 Spadina Crescent East
S7K 2H6
Telephone: 306-975-4509
Fax: 306-957-4818

Winnipeg, MB
363 Broadway
4th floor
R3C 3N9
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 204-983-2232
FC: 204-983-2509
TCC: 204-983-1785
Fax: 204-983-7636
TTY: 204-984-4440

Toronto, ON
180 Queen Street
2nd floor
M5V 3L6
Telephone:
FCA/FC/CMAC: 416-952-8006 / 416-973-3356 / 416-954-9823
TCC: 416 973-9181 or 1-800-927-5499
Fax:
FCA/FC/CMAC: 416-954-5068
TCC: 416-973-5944
TTY
FCA/FC/TCC: 416 954-4245

London, ON *
231 Dundas Street
3rd floor
N6A 1H1
Telephone: 1 800-927-5499
FAX: 519-675-3391
* Court room facility
only.

Montréal, QC
30 McGill Street
H2Y 3Z7
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 514-283-5200
FC: 514-283-4820
TCC: 514-283-9912
Fax: FCA/CMAC/FC 514-283-6004
TCC: 514-496-1996
TTY: 514-283-3017

Québec, QC
Palais de Justice
Room 500A,
300 Jean Lesage Blvd.
G1K 8K6
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 418-648-4964
FC: 418-648-4920
TCC: 418-648-7324
Fax: 418-648-4051
TTY: 418-648-4644

Fredericton, NB
82 Westmorland Street
Room 100
E3B 3L3
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 506-452-2036
FC: 506-452-3016
TCC: 506-452-2424
Fax: 506-452-3584
TTY: 506-452-3036

Saint John, NB
110 Charlotte Street
Room 413
E2L 2J4
Telephone: 506-636-4990
Fax: 506-658-3070

Halifax, NS
1801 Hollis Street
Room 1720
B3J 3N4
Telephone:
FCA/CMAC: 902-426-5326
FC: 902-426-3282
TCC: 902-426-5372
Fax: 902-426-5514
TTY: 902-426-9776

Charlottetown, PE
Sir Henry Louis
Davies Law Courts
P.O. Box 2000,
42 Water Street
C1A 8B9
Telephone: 902-368-0179
Fax: 902-368-0266

St. John’s, NL
The Court House
309 Duckworth Street
A1C 5M3
Telephone: 709-772-2884
Fax: 709-772-6351