Family and Federal Circuit Courts to merge after Morrison government secures Senate votes

The move comes after three years of pushing by the government, and follows a deal struck with a pair of Senators.

One Nation leader Senator Pauline Hanson and Independent Senator Rex Patrick. Picture: AAP

Australia’s Family Court and Federal Circuit Court are finally set to merge after the Morrison government struck a deal with Senate crossbencher Rex Patrick and Pauline Hanson’s One Nation to pass the controversial legal reforms through parliament as early as this week.

The consolidation of the two courts has been pursued by the Coalition for nearly three years despite opposition from Labor, the Greens, and large swathes of the legal community.

Under the reforms, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court — which deal with some of the most sensitive legal cases, often involving children — will become one new court with two separate divisions

Senator Patrick said on Tuesday he struck a deal to ensure the first division of the new joint court — continuing the work of the Family Court — will never have fewer than 25 judges, and he also scored a multimillion dollar package for his home state South Australia’s Family Court transition.

“There are still three courts ­essentially in this new system — the family law division of the circuit court, the original jurisdiction of the Family Court, and the appeals division of the Famil Court — so the purpose is to generate efficiencies,” he said.

“What this bill does is eliminate one admin body so you have common rules, common buildings. In Sydney, the Family Court and Federal Circuit Court share a common building, so it can work.”

Attorney-General Christian Porter announced in 2018 that the government would merge the Family Court with the lower-level Federal Circuit Court to improve efficiency and stop families bouncing between the two courts.

The plan prompted a backlash from legal bodies and domestic violence experts, who warned that abolishing the stand-alone Family Court would result in a loss of specialist expertise, which could harm women and children who are facing abuse.

On Tuesday, Mr Porter said the reforms would help to deal with long delays for families in front of the courts and accused the bill’s opponents of having a “vested interest” in the current system.

“All those working in or around the court system have known about problems in the system for decades and contributed to review after review,” he said. “In fact, this system is possibly one of the most reviewed of any area over the past 20 years.

“It is fact that many of the loudest voices in the debate around this issue have been those with a vested interest in the system … that exacerbates delays and draws out matters which should be settled sooner, and as a consequence increases costs to users of the courts.”

Opposition legal affairs spokesman Mark Dreyfus said the merger was not the answer for “vulnerable children”.

“The Family Court is too important to be traded for short-team deals,” he said.