ARCHIVED - Courts Administration Service

This page has been archived.

2006-2007
Departmental Performance Report

Courts Administration Service

---

The Honourable Robert D. Nicholson
Minister of Justice and Attorney General of Canada

---

Table of Contents

SECTION I  -  OVERVIEW
Acting Chief Administrator's Message
Management Representation Statement
Summary Information
     Departmental Priorities
Overall Performance
    Operational Environment
    Financial Context
    Context
    Alignment with Government of Canada Outcomes

SECTION II  -  ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME
Analysis by Program Activity
    Strategic Outcome
    Program Activity Architecture

SECTION III  -  SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
Organizational Information
    Organizational Structure
    Table 1: Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending
    Table 2: Resources by Program Activity
    Table 3: Voted and Statutory Items
    Table 4: Services Received Without Charge
    Table 5: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue
    Table 6: Resource Requirements by Branch
    Table 7: Details on Project Spending
    Table 8: Financial Statements of Departments and Agencies
    Table 9: Internal Audits and Evaluations
    Table 10: Travel Policies

SECTION IV  -  OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST
Corporate Services
    Offices of the Courts Administration Service

SECTION I - OVERVIEW

Acting Chief Administrator's Message

I am pleased to present the Performance Report of the Courts Administration Service (“the Service”) for the period ending March 31, 2007.

The purpose of this report is to explain to Canadians how the achievements of the Service make a difference in their lives. It also reports on the status of commitments made in the Report on Plans and Priorities for 2006–2007.

The Service pursues its mandate by providing support and services to the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. Its role is to facilitate access to these Courts by the public seeking judicial redress, and at the same time to safeguard the independence of the judiciary. To achieve these objectives, the Service works closely with the four Chief Justices in determining precisely what each Court requires, and at the same time in identifying areas where synergies may be explored in order to optimize our current level of resources.

The Service is focusing its efforts and resources on implementing new case management technology. The expansion of e-filing, including, in particular, income tax certificates, is a good example of our advances in this field. In addition, the relocation of our Ontario regional office enabled us to equip the courtrooms with the most up-to-date technology, making it easier for parties to transmit and analyze files. These projects are still in their infancy, but they will soon revolutionize access to legal services for all Canadians. 

In addition to our technology-related projects, I note that we must increase our efforts and creativity in maintaining and attracting new talent. We have continued to work on succession planning, but this challenge is still far from being met.

I therefore wish to express my sincere appreciation to the Chief Justices, Judges and Prothonotaries for their support, to the staff of the Service for their continued commitment to excellence in service delivery, and to public officials from a number of provinces and territories.

 

R.P. Guenette

---

Management Representation Statement

I submit for tabling in Parliament, the 2006-2007 Departmental Performance Report for the Courts Administration Service. This document has been prepared based on the reporting principles contained in the Guide for the Preparation of Part III of the 2006-2007 Estimates: Reports on Plans and Priorities and Departmental Performance Reports: It adheres to the specific reporting requirements outlined in the Treasury Board Secretariat guidance; It is based on the department's approved Strategic Outcome and Program Activity Architecture that were approved by the Treasury Board; It presents consistent, comprehensive, balanced and reliable information;  It provides a basis of accountability for the results achieved with the resources and authorities entrusted to it; and It reports finances based on approved numbers from the Estimates and the Public Accounts of Canada.
Name:	Raymond P. Guenette
Title:	Acting Chief Administrator

Summary Information

Department's Reason for Existence

The role of the Courts Administration Service is to provide registry and administrative services to four courts of law: the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. These services permit individuals, companies, organizations and the Government of Canada to submit disputes and other matters to the Courts, and enable the Courts to hear and resolve the cases before them fairly, without delay and as efficiently as possible.

The Courts

The Courts served by the Service 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, to establish Courts “for the better Administration of the Laws of Canada”. The Federal Court of Appeal has jurisdiction to hear appeals of decisions of the Federal Court and the Tax Court of Canada and certain statutory appeals from federal administrative tribunals as stated in legislation. It also has exclusive jurisdiction to hear applications for judicial review of decisions of 14 federal boards, commissions and tribunals listed in section 28 of the Federal Courts Act (see http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-7/index.html). Parties to a proceeding in the Federal Court of Appeal may be granted leave, or permission, to appeal the decision of the Federal Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada if the case involves a question of public importance. Pursuant to section 5(1) of the Federal Courts Act, the full judicial complement of the Federal Court of Appeal consists of the Chief Justice and twelve judges. On March 31, 2007, the Federal Court of Appeal consisted of the Chief Justice and nine judges, together with three supernumerary judges. For further information on the Federal Court of Appeal, please refer to http://www.fca-caf.gc.ca. The Federal Court is a court of first instance. It has original, but not exclusive, jurisdiction over cases by and against the federal Crown (including aboriginal law claims), proceedings involving admiralty law and intellectual property law, and jurisdiction conferred by approximately 100 federal statutes. The Federal Court also has exclusive jurisdiction to hear national security proceedings and applications for judicial review of the decisions of all federal boards, commissions and tribunals other than those over which the Federal Court of Appeal has jurisdiction (see above). This jurisdiction includes, in particular, applications for judicial review of decisions of the Immigration and Refugee Board. Pursuant to section 5.1(1) of the Federal Courts Act, the full judicial complement of the Federal Court consists of the Chief Justice and thirty-two full-time judges. On March 31, 2007, the Federal Court consisted of twenty-seven full-time judges, three supernumerary judges, five deputy judges and five prothonotaries. For further information about the Federal Court, please refer to http://www.fct-cf.gc.ca. The main function of the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada is to hear appeals from courts martial, which are military courts established under the National Defence Act, and which hear cases under the Code of Service Discipline found in Parts III and VII of that Act. Judges of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, as well as incumbent trial and appellate judges of the provincial superior courts, are members of this Court. On March 31, 2007, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada consisted of a Chief Justice and sixty-one judges. For further information on the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, please refer to http://www.cmac-cacm.ca. The Tax Court of Canada has exclusive, original jurisdiction to hear appeals and references under twelve different Acts of Parliament. Most of the appeals made to the Court relate to income tax, the goods and services tax, or employment insurance. While many appeals are subject to procedures similar to those of the Federal Court, appeals under what is known as the “informal procedure” are heard as informally and expeditiously as circumstances and considerations of fairness permit. Pursuant to section 4 (1) of the Tax Court of Canada Act, the Court consists of a Chief Justice, an Associate Chief Justice and up to twenty judges. On March 31, 2007, the Tax Court of Canada consisted of the Chief Justice, seventeen judges, five supernumerary judges and six deputy judges. For further information on the Tax Court of Canada, visit http://www.tcc-cci.gc.ca.

The Service is committed to providing the public with effective, timely and fair access, in either official language, to the litigation processes of the Courts, while enhancing judicial independence.

The Service is responsible for meeting the Courts' requirements and for ensuring that the public has access to the Courts and to their records.  The specific functions of the Service include

• providing litigants and their counsel with services relating to court hearings;
• informing litigants of rules of practice, court directives and procedures;
• maintaining court records;
• processing documents filed by or issued to litigants, and recording all proceedings;
• serving as a depository to allow for the enforcement of decisions made by the Courts and federal administrative tribunals, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal;
• providing judges, prothonotaries1 and staff with a wide array of direct support services, including library services and appropriate facilities and security.

In order to facilitate the public's access to the Courts, the Service has offices in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta and British Columbia. In addition, registry services and courtrooms are provided through agreements with the governments of New Brunswick, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Saskatchewan, the Northwest Territories, the Yukon Territory and Nunavut.

Financial Resources
	2006-2007
Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual Spending
$62.2M	$67M	$66.6M
Human Resources
	2006-2007
Planned	Actual	Difference
655	606	49

Departmental Priorities

STATUS ON PERFORMANCE
Strategic Outcome:  The public has effective, timely and fair access, in either official language, to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada.
($ millions)	Program Activity  -Expected Results	Performance Status	2006-2007
			Planned Spending	Actual Spending
Priority 1 Implementing a comprehensive, dynamic and fully integrated people management strategy which will support all employees in the efforts of consolidating the Service	Registry Services	The Service completed physical co-location of the Ontario Regional Office which provides an integrated client service approach. Defined specific initiatives to pursue our succession planning strategy. This will include new developmental program and the establishment of competency profiles.	0.35	0.2
	Judicial Services
	The planned initiatives supporting this priority are expected to assist and sustain the efforts of consolidation in providing to all employees a work environment that fulfills their goals and aspirations.
Priority 2 Promoting innovation and pursuing modernization of business practices and processes	Registry Services	The Service has established and implemented a common informatics' platform that will allow the integration of various e-components including e-filing services and digital recording. Registry processes were reviewed including transmission and recording of documents using notably the scanning methodology.	5.5	2.5
	Judicial Services
	The planned initiatives will allow the Service to provide registry and judicial services that are flexible and responsive, while ensuring the best value for public money.

Overall Performance

Operational Environment

During the last fiscal year, the Service focused particularly on establishing the operational framework for implementing new technologies in order to optimize the provision of our services and to apply these technologies consistently and universally to case management. To achieve this, we have initiated feasibility studies to evaluate the financial impacts on the Service and the ways in which each of these technologies could be better integrated.   
Alongside our interest in investing in emerging technologies, we have identified concrete lines of action for succession planning. Thus, we are planning to implement a registry officer development program in order to recruit and retain our staff and facilitate external recruitment. The issue of retaining and developing our staff remains a major concern. The aging of the population and the dynamics that characterize the service at the four Courts raise significant challenges to the Service.   
In addition, we have noted that the Service has an enviable reputation at the international level and is playing an active role in partnerships with countries such as Russia, Ukraine and China. A number of Chinese judges came to Canada for a six-week training session in order to learn about our registry procedures. However, our awareness activities on the national scale are more modest and will have to be expanded in the next few years in order to highlight the Service's role in the administration of justice.

Financial Context

The Service is entirely funded through yearly appropriations approved by Parliament. The Service also collects revenue through filing fees, fines and sales of copies of filed documentation, including copies of judgments and orders. These non-respendable revenues are deposited to the Government of Canada's Consolidated Revenue Fund.

At the request of the Chief Justice, four Federal Court prothonotaries were appointed to the Federal Court between 1999 and 2003. Furthermore, five Federal Court deputy judges have been appointed to the Federal Court since 2004. The Service did receive temporary funding in December 2006 for fiscal years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 for these specific positions, but funding needs to be requested every year, even though the requirements are of an ongoing nature. This is very time-consuming for officials of the Service. The Service will continue to work with the Treasury Board Secretariat and other partners with a view to finding a permanent solution for funding these policy issues.

It should be noted that there are additional expenses that the Service has had to absorb over the years which has added to the financial stress for the organization. The Service has absorbed costs related to procurement savings in the aftermath of the Government's Expenditure Review exercise that was conducted three years ago, as there were few actual procurement savings that could be realized for the items that are most significant to the Service (e.g., translation and court reports).

As recorded in the 2006–2007 Public Accounts of Canada, the Service received $67M in funding from Parliament. The actual amount of funds spent in that year was $66.6M, resulting in a small lapse of $0.4M.

Context

A key aspect of the Service's planning and operating environment is that it has virtually no control over the forces affecting the number of cases it receives in each of the four Courts.  For instance, the workload of the Federal Court is intrinsically related to the volume of refugee claimants that the Immigration Review Board (IRB) is handling. As well, any legislative amendments changing federal acts might at some point in time affect the workload of the Courts. The Supreme Court's recent decision in Charkaoui on issuing security certificates will have an impact on legal procedures and will possibly result in more appeals to our Courts, especially the Federal Court.

This unpredictable environment requires the Service to adjust rapidly to new demands and be fully aware of the legislative environment that will affect the workload for all the four courts.  In that context, the Service has maintained working relationships with other federal entities (Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC), the Canadian Border Security Agency (CBSA) and the Immigration Refugee Board (IRB)), in order to provide a sound assessment of the future workload of the four courts. Working cooperatively with these entities will ensure the Service will be in a better position to grasp and assess external factors. However, in these relationships the key element is to maintain our judicial independence while at the same time taking a proactive approach in assessing potential impacts of current and future federal initiatives on the Service's ability to provide efficient service to the four Courts.

Modernizing Our Planning Approach

The Service is continuing its efforts in the development of integrated activity planning. The regional offices have begun a planning exercise based on the Service's strategic priorities. During the past year, the Service also reviewed the recommendations made as part of the Management Accountability Framework (MAF) evaluation. Several of the points raised by the Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) have been implemented. We are still working on the Performance Management Framework, which will be finalized in the 2007-2008 fiscal year.   

Embracing New Court Technology

The Service has worked on several aspects of its technology platform. For example, we have migrated to a common e-mail system, which will allow us to add new software and keep it up to date. Our major challenge lies with implementing a new case management system. This system will be on a platform shared by all the Courts and will be a primary source for implementation of our Performance Management Framework.

Risks, Challenges and Opportunities

The issue of recruitment and staff retention remains a primary concern for the Service. With the planned departure of 20% of our staff within the next three years, we will have to speed up recruitment and, very likely, cooperate with other departments to fill our vacant positions. Our further difficulty in recruiting human resources staff limits our ability to develop and implement a succession plan. In order to address this problem, additional funding has been requested to help the Service in implementing several initiatives flowing from the Public Service Modernization Act and especially the Public Service Employment Act.

It should be noted that the Service has exchanges with several other countries, notably China, Russia and Australia, as well as with the United Nations, in order to exchange expertise in the area of courts administration. This is normally done in collaboration with the office of the Commissioner of Federal Judicial Affairs, and the National Judicial Institute. Since many other countries are also reassessing their judicial systems and procedures, it is anticipated that the Service will increase its level of international activities.

Alignment with Government of Canada Outcomes

The Service's sole strategic outcome is as follows:

The public has effective, timely and fair access, in either official language, to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada.

Canada's Performance 2006 is divided into four key policy areas: economic, social, international, and government affairs. The Service's strategic outcome is aligned with the area of government affairs as it provides support to the Courts which, by their decisions, assist the machinery of government, while maintaining judicial independence.

Section II — ANALYSIS OF PROGRAM ACTIVITIES BY STRATEGIC OUTCOME

Analysis by Program Activity

Strategic Outcome

The Courts Administration Service is committed to realizing the following strategic outcome:

The public has effective, timely and fair access, in either official language, to the litigation processes of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada.

Program Activity Architecture

The Service's Program Activity Architecture consists of three program activities – Registry Services, Judicial Services and Corporate Services.

Registry Services

These services provide the Courts with litigation processes support.  This includes processing documents filed by or issued to litigants, attending court sittings, recording proceedings, providing information to litigants, preserving the records and information base required by the Courts and issuing legal instruments to enforce the Courts' decisions.

Financial Resources:

Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending
$40.1M	$43.2M	$42.5M

Human Resources:

Planned (FTE)	Authorities	Difference
427	389	38

FTE – Full Time Equivalent

Judicial Services

These services provide judicial support to the judges and prothonotaries, as well as to executive officers, judicial assistants, library employees, revisers/jurilinguists, law clerks and other staff who provide direct support to the judiciary in fulfilling its responsibilities.

Financial Resources:

Planned Spending	Authorities	Actual Spending
$22.1M	$23.8M	$24.1M

Human Resources:

Planned (FTE)	Authorities	Difference
228	217	11

FTE – Full Time Equivalent

Corporate Services

Please refer to text in Section IV – Other Items of Interest.

Priority 1 Implementing a comprehensive, dynamic and fully integrated people management strategy which will support all employees in the efforts of consolidating the Service

Program Activity:   Registry Services
Key Initiative:        Relocation of Staff from the Lorne Building

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Improved employee well-being. - provide an adequate and suitable work environment	A proposal by PWGSC offering to move all the staff from the Lorne Building, 90 Elgin Street in Ottawa, to the Thomas D'Arcy McGee Building at 90 Sparks Street in Ottawa.
PWGSC is proposing to move all the staff of the Service currently working at 90 Elgin Street in Ottawa to the premises at 90 Sparks Street in Ottawa, which will be fitted out for the registry of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Federal Court by summer 2008.

Key Initiative:          Harmonization of Registries

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Increased citizen-focused services. - enhance the use of our resources and provide a common access point for the public	Completion of the co-location initiative in Toronto. Increased capacity to serve clients of all four Courts in the Service's ten points of service across the country. Creation and staffing of formal Operational Training Division.
Co-location of Regional Offices was completed with the move of the Ontario Regional Office in 2006.  The Service has made great advances in providing staff with tools, training and exchange opportunities with a view to ensuring that all registry staff are familiar with the rules, practices and procedures of the four Courts they support. An Operational Training Division was created and staffed, and now provides a variety of specialized training courses to staff across the country.  Practice and procedures manuals have been reviewed and updated, and new reference materials developed, in order to further support and assist staff.

Key Initiative:          Implementation of Outreach Activities

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Increased visibility, awareness and understanding of the services provided by the Courts Administration Service. - heighten public awareness of judicial independence	Maintaining a positive and productive network with the judicial community and foreign delegations.
The Service continued its discussions and networking by means of various interdepartmental meetings and continues to maintain a forum of exchange with various foreign delegations which allows the Service to be known as a model of excellence in the administration of justice.

Program Activity:   Judicial Services

Key Initiative:        Review of Judicial Services

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Increased efficiencies throughout the Service and lower operational costs. -allocate appropriate resources to requirements, and enhance fiscal accountability and service delivery	Significant reduction in translation and posting of court decisions.  Negotiation of revised agreement including performance indicators with the Translation Bureau.
The Judicial Services Directorate undertook an in-depth analysis of its workflow in order to optimize the translation to posting process of court decisions. Aside from this internal review, the Service also negociated a new agreement with the Translation bureau that will ensure specific delivery deadlines for our translation requests.

 

Priority 2 Promoting innovation and pursuing modernization of business practices and processes

Program Activity:   Registry Services

Key Initiative:        Electronic Filing

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Modernization of operational activities to reflect best practices and improve procedures. - ensure our current registry operations can accommodate more cases involving e-filing	350 e-filings received for intellectual property cases. Activities undertaken to expand the project scope in order to include other areas of the court's jurisdiction such as immigration and admiralty.
The Canada Revenue Agency has proposed the expansion of the e-filing project to allow for electronic filing of income tax/GST certificates. Since early 2006, representatives from CRA have worked closely with the e-filing project team to explore the legal and technical issues related to this proposal. This expansion is a direct result of the small but measured success we have enjoyed with the intellectual property pilot project. It is also the result of a strong partnership with Lexis Nexis, a service provider which facilitates connection between users.

Key Initiative:          Digital Recording

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Modernization of operational activities to reflect best practices and improve procedures. - complete a feasibility study, purchase the hardware and software and implement the system in the courtrooms	Business plan for digital recording on track.
Digital recording is a component of the Case Management System for which the Service is proposing to seek funding from the Treasury Board (TB). A detailed business case will be developed and reviewed to ensure funding requirements for digital recording form part of an overall IT integration strategy.

Key Initiative:          Electronic Courtrooms

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Modernization of operational activities to reflect best practices and improve procedures. - improve service delivery and accessibility to court proceedings	A business plan combining various e-components in development.
The electronic courtroom is the culmination of several initiatives such as wireless display of evidence, Internet access in the courtroom, document management software and digital recording. The latter is a component of the Case Management System. A detailed business case will be developed and reviewed to ensure funding requirements of digital recording form part of an overall IT integration strategy.

Key Initiative:          New Case Management System

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Greater efficiency throughout the Service and decrease in operational costs. - provide the registries with the tools required to better serve the public as well as harmonize internal processes through a new case management system	Upgrade of several components to allow for the disposal of old technology supporting the existing system. Functional and detailed design established for phase 1.
The server platform is aging and unsupported, new functions cannot be added, problems and downtime are more frequent and unacceptable. The software has been upgraded to run from a web browser. In phase 1, the existing systems will maintain the functions currently provided to the four Courts on an upgraded technical platform to provide greater stability and a suitable environment for future development. The Case Management System is the heart of interdependent components such as e-filing, digital recording, e-faxing, and Judgment and Orders. This entire integrated solution is a major component of the modernization initiative.

Key Initiative:          Modernization of Practices and Procedures 

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Modernization of operational activities to reflect best practices and improve procedures. - deliver our services to citizens more effectively	Improvements made in the areas of scanning and electronic transmittal and receipt of documents, review of fees and fee structures, transmission of decisions to parties, and harmonization of practices across courts.
Several immediate changes have been made to existing practices and procedures, and pilot projects, such as document scanning and filing date uniformity for e-filing and scanned documents, have been implemented in other areas further to the review of current workflows. Through the implementation of initiatives such as electronic filing and the design of a new Case Management System, opportunities for immediate efficiencies and service improvements have been identified and acted upon.

Program Activity:   Judicial Services

Key Initiative:          Construction of the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Judicial Building (PETJB)

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Increased efficiencies throughout the Service and lower operational costs. -meet long-term accommodation requirements of the Courts; reduce operating costs, improve visibility and simplify security requirements	No longer identified as a key initiative.
The Service has identified other means to maximize synergy and efficiencies without the construction of a new building. The Service has reached an agreement with PWGSC to secure additional space in the Thomas D'Arcy McGee Building to accommodate employees currently located in the Lorne Building. The last component will be to relocate judges and registry staff of the Tax Court of Canada and Corporate Services in the Thomas D'Arcy McGee building. This will complete our accommodation strategy for Ottawa.

Key Initiative:          Toronto Federal Judicial Centre Project (FJC)

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Increased efficiencies throughout the Service, including improved security of judges and staff and greater capacity to meet case management workload. - reduce operational costs and offer to the public a single access and information point	All Toronto Local Office staff now located in one location to offer a single access and information point for the public. Project completed on time and under budget.
The planning and implementation of the move of the Toronto registries, which were located at 200 King Street West and 330 University Avenue, were completed successfully. The registries moved to the new premises at 180 Queen Street West in Toronto. A greater harmonization of registry services to the public has resulted in a more transparent and efficient delivery of services to the clients.

Key Initiative:          Vancouver Federal Judicial Centre Project (FJC)

Expected Results	Results Achieved
Space optimization of tenant requirements to maximize utilization. - optimize space to reduce real estate costs	Space optimization study completed.
As a result of the review of registry services to the public as well as to the four Courts, the Service has identified surplus space requirements to Public Works and Government Services Canada (PWGSC).

Section III — SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

Organizational Information

Our mandate is to

• ensure the efficient provision of service to the four Courts;
• enhance the judicial independence of the Courts by placing them at arm's length from the Government of Canada; and
• enhance accountability for the use of public money.

Organizational Structure

In fall 2006, the Service announced important organizational changes. Notably, the regional and registry operations were united under the Deputy Chief Administrator's position, and Corporate Services is now under the responsibility of an executive director.  This organizational structure reflects the Service's Program Activities Architecture.

 

FCA/CMAC Federal Court of Appeal /Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
FC                 Federal Court
TCC              Tax Court of Canada

The Chief Administrator of the Courts Administration Service is accountable to Parliament through the Minister of Justice.

The powers, duties and functions of the Chief Administrator are set out in the Courts Administration Service Act as follows:

• the Chief Administrator has all the powers necessary for the overall effective and efficient management and administration of all court services, including court facilities and libraries and corporate services and staffing (subsection 7(2)); and
• 
  
• the Chief Administrator, in consultation with the Chief Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court and the Tax Court of Canada, shall establish and maintain the registry or registries for those courts in any organizational form or forms and prepare budgetary submissions for the requirements of those courts and for the related needs of the Service (subsection 7(3)).

The Courts Administration Service Act also places 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 (subsection 7(4)); 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 (subsection 9(1)).

Table 1: Comparison of Planned to Actual Spending

(including Full-time Equivalents)

($ millions)	2004–05 Actual1	2005–06 Actual2	2006–07
			Main Estimates3	Planned Spending4	Total Authorities5	Total Actuals6
Provide Registry Services	35.6	38.4	40.3	40.1	43.2	42.5
Provide Judicial Services	19.8	21.2	22.2	22.1	23.8	24.1
Total	55.4	59.6	62.5	62.2	67.0	66.6
Less: Non-respendable revenue	(5.4)	(5.0)	N/A	(6.9)	N/A	(4.5)
Plus: Cost of services received without charge	19.2	19.6	N/A	19.9	N/A	23.8
Total Departmental Spending	69.2	74.2	62.5	75.2	N/A	85.9
Full-time Equivalents	562	567	N/A	655	N/A	606 7

Notes:

(1)  Source 2004-05 DPR.
(2)  Source 2005-06 DPR.
(3 & 4)  Source 2006-07 RPP. The variance with the Main Estimates reflects the reductions to the department's planned spending as a result of the Expenditure Review Committee (ERC) procurement savings exercise.
(5)  Source: 2006-2007 Public Accounts. 
(6)  Source: 2006-2007 Public Accounts.  Total includes contributions to employee benefits plans. Reference should be made to the discussion under “Table 3:  Voted and Statutory Items” for further information.
(7)  The Courts Administration Service (CAS) has staffed a number of vacant positions this fiscal year. However, it is still short of its targets as CAS lacks the funding to fill all of its required positions.

Table 2: Resources by Program Activity

($ millions)

2006–2007
Program Activity	Budgetary
	Operating	Total: Gross Budgetary Expenditures	Total: Net Budgetary Expenditures	Total
Provide Registry Services
Main Estimates	40.3	40.3	40.3	40.3
Planned Spending	40.1	40.1	40.1	40.1
Total Authorities	43.2	43.2	43.2	43.2
Actual Spending	42.5	42.5	42.5	42.5
Provide Judicial Services
Main Estimates	22.2	22.2	22.2	22.2
Planned Spending	22.1	22.1	22.1	22.1
Total Authorities	23.8	23.8	23.8	23.8
Actual Spending	24.1	24.1	24.1	24.1

Note: As per the Guide for the Preparation of 2006-2007 Departmental Performance Report, some columns have been deleted because they are not applicable.

Table 3: Voted and Statutory Items

($ millions)

Vote or Statutory Item	Truncated Vote  or Statutory Wording	2006–2007
		Main  Estimates	Planned  Spending	Total  Authorities	Total Actual
30	Operating expenditures	55.9	55.6	60.9	60.5
(S)	Contributions to employee benefit plans	6.6	6.6	6.1	6.1
	Total	62.5	62.2	67	66.6

A) The $4.5M variance between the main Estimate and Total Authorities are due to:

Reductions caused by the Expenditure Review Committee (ERC) procurement savings exercise	(0.3)
Operating budget carry forward	2.3
Salary funding for prothonotaries, deputy judges fees and other items	2.6
Compensation for collective agreements	0.4
Employee Benefit Plan adjustment	(0.5) ____
Total variance increase	4.5

B) As can be seen in the table above, the Service ended the year with a Public Accounts lapse of just $0.4M, or 0.6% (the difference between total authorities and total actual).  The Service was very careful with its finances, but the financial situation is extremely tight in the organization. The Service continues to seek a permanent solution to funding prothonotaries' salaries and deputy judges' fees.

Table 4: Services Received Without Charge

($ millions)	2006–2007 Actual Spending
Accommodation provided by Public Works and Government Services Canada  (PWGSC)	20.7
Contributions covering employers' share of employees' insurance premiums and expenditures paid by Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (TBS ) (excluding revolving funds); employer's contribution to employees' insured benefits plans and associated expenditures paid by TBS	3.0
Salary and associated expenditures of legal services provided by the Department of Justice Canada	0.1
Total 2006–2007 Services received without charge	23.8

Table 5: Sources of Respendable and Non-Respendable Revenue

Non-Respendable Revenue

($ millions)	Actual 2004-051	Actual 2005-062	2006-2007
			Planned Revenue3	Actual
Provide Registry Services
Refund of previous years' expenditures	0.0	0.1	0.1	0.1
Services fees	1.8	1.7	1.4	1.7
Court fines	0.2	0.0	2.4	0.0
Miscellaneous non-tax revenues	3.3	3.2	3.0	2.7
Total  Non-Respendable Revenue	5.4	5.0	6.9	4.5

 Notes:

(1)       From 2004-05 DPR.
(2)       From 2005-06 DPR.
(3)       From 2006-07 RPP. It should be noted that previous to 2004-2005, court fines were substantial. However, the fines in the last 3 years have now dropped to inconsequential amounts. CAS has no control over court fines, as they are imposed by judicial officers. Predicting these fines is entirely dependent on the cases being brought before the judiciary.

- Numbers in columns may not add up due to rounding.
- As per the Guide for the Preparation of 2006-2007 DPR, some columns have been deleted because they are not applicable.

Table 6: Resource Requirements by Branch

($ millions)

2006–07
Branch or Sector	Planned Spending1	Actual Spending
Federal Court of Appeal and Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada Registry Operations
Provide Registry Services	1.1	1.2
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Federal Court Registry Operations
Provide Registry Services	4.8	5.0
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Tax Court of Canada Registry Operations
Provide Registry Services	2.0	2.0
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Quebec and Atlantic Region
Provide Registry Services	4.9	5.8
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Ontario Region
Provide Registry Services	5.1	5.7
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Western Region
Provide Registry Services	4.4	4.5
Provide Judicial Services	-	-
Executive Offices2
Provide Registry Services	-	-
Provide Judicial Services	3.7	4.0
Judicial Assistants
Provide Registry Services	-	-
Provide Judicial Services	3.8	4.6
Law Clerk Program
Provide Registry Services	-	-
Provide Judicial Services	3.0	3.6
Library
Provide Registry Services	-	-
Provide Judicial Services	2.2	2.3
Office of the Chief Administrator3
Provide Registry Services	1.5	1.6
Provide Judicial Services	0.8	0.8
Finance & Corporate Services, Chauffeurs & Court Attendants Services4
Provide Registry Services	11.1	11.5
Provide Judicial Services	6.1	6.0
Human Resources
Provide Registry Services	1.4	1.5
Provide Judicial Services	0.7	0.8
IM IT, Record Mgmt, Best Practices & Modernization
Provide Registry Services	3.6	3.8
Provide Judicial Services	2.0	1.9
TOTAL	62.2	66.65

(1)       Planned Spending from 2006-07 RPP.
(2)       Includes judges' offices, Office of the Director General of Judicial Services, as well as Revision.
(3)       Includes Office of the Chief Administrator, Strategic Planning & Communications, and the Office of the Deputy Chief Administrator.
(4)       Includes Office of the Director General of Finance & Corporate Services; Facilities; Telecommunications; Capital Projects; Security Services; Accounting Operations and Systems; Planning, Budgeting and Analysis; Material Management and Contracting; Administrative Services and Translation.
(5)       The increase between the planned spending and the total spending is approximately 7.1% for all of CAS. See Table 3 for the main increases of authorities during the course of the fiscal year. The majority of the increases by Branch that were above this number were caused by the following factors. First, the estimates for 2006-07 were made in January 2006. The actual expenses occurred from April 2006 to March 2007. Due to some of the lower staffing levels in certain branches in early 2006, those branches were able to increase their levels more than others. Second, funding for increases in program integrity funding were targeted for certain branches. However, this was already taken into account when allocating percentages amongst the various sectors in January 2006. Third, certain collective bargaining agreements were concluded during the year, such as for the employees in the law clerk program.

Table 7: Details on Project Spending

Program Activity    -    Corporate Services

Projects	Project Phases
Electronic Services	Initial Planning and Identification (Initial phase in 2006-2007)
Toronto Federal Judicial Centre	Project Close-out

Supplementary information on project spending can be found at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/rma/dpr2/06-07/index_e.asp.

Table 8: Financial Statements of Departments and Agencies

(including Agents of Parliament)

Courts Administration Service Financial Statements (unaudited) For the year ending March 31, 2007

Courts Administration Service
Statement of Operations (Unaudited)

For the Year Ended March 31
(in dollars)

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.

Courts Administration Service
Statement of Financial Position (unaudited)

At March 31
(in dollars)

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.

Courts Administration Service
Statement of Equity of Canada (Unaudited)

At March 31
(in dollars)

The accompanying notes form an integral part of these financial statements.

Section IV — OTHER ITEMS OF INTEREST

Corporate Services

Corporate Services provides services such as finance, human resources, information technology, information management, telecommunications, facilities, translation, general administration and security to the Courts and to the Service itself.

Significant Financial Issues in 2006-2007

The Service was able to temporarily stabilize some of its program integrity funding for fiscal years 2006 07 and 2007 08; however, the Service has not been able to secure permanent funding for these critical policy issues. These expenditures relate to salaries and travel expenses of prothonotaries, new deputy judges' expenses, including their fees and travel expenses, and certain new key positions that were required as a result of the Service's merger.

The Service did receive separate funding for the completion of the Toronto Federal Judicial Centre (FJC), and this project was completed under budget. This type of financial arrangement and support is recommended for future projects. It should be noted that the Service realized sizable savings by recycling a significant amount of furniture and other materials. Consequently, the Service requested, and the Treasury Board Secretariat approved, use of those savings from the FJC to fit-up expansion space at Pink Road for greater archiving capacity for the Courts' records.

Human Resources / People Capacity

With the arrival of a new Learning Advisor in 2006-2007, a project to develop personal learning plans for all employees was delayed because of the implementation of the Required Training initiatives. This demanded a large portion of the Learning Advisor's time as it applied to supervisors, managers, and executives, functional specialists and first-time public servants.

In line with the Public Service Modernization Act (PSMA), the Human Resources Branch prepared a Treasury Board submission to obtain additional funding to continue to develop new staffing policies, guidelines, processes and tools to assist managers who will be receiving staffing sub-delegation. Additional resources are needed to assist managers to develop human resources plans in line with their business plans, to determine their current and future needs.

With respect to our succession planning initiative, we have identified immediate issues that we need to tackle such as competency profiles and rejuvenation of in-house developmental programs.

Records Management

Within the past year, information management/records management (IM/RM) division was combined with the IT division to create the IM/IT Branch. The purpose of this strategic reorganization was to better manage information within the Service and to utilize technology as a tool.

An important undertaking in the records management section was to centralize all court document archives (dormant and semi-dormant records). All the records stored in two locations were combined and moved to a facility located in Aylmer, Quebec. This move made it possible to track all court documents more easily and accurately. This undertaking represented a move of close to 70,000 boxes of records plus 120 bins of exhibits which then had to be classified and indexed to simplify tracking. Some records dated as far back as the early 19th century.

To ensure efficiency, this initiative had to be supported by certain retention and disposal best practices that are now being put together and should ensure growth and sufficient storage space for 5-10 years.

We are in discussion with Library and Archives Canada to finalize a memorandum of understanding which would have them take over close to 2,000 boxes from the Exchequer Court. The purpose of this agreement is to provide for the transfer of that portion of the records of the Exchequer Court having archival and historical value to the custody and control of the National Archives of Canada in order that Canadian citizens may have convenient and continuous access to them. This transfer will allow for a complete and orderly disposal of all records of the Exchequer Court.

Following recommendations from the records management committee, a customized in-house list of procedures has and continues to be put together to guide employees in regard to the retention and disposal of administrative records. These standards are based on the Multi-Institutional Disposition Authority (MIDA) agreement and are customized for each business line in the organization.

Government On-Line

There have been more than 350 e-filings received for intellectual property cases. Based on this success, the Service will expand the e-filing solution to admiralty cases and immigration leave applications. The Service also implemented the required security to allow for e-filing system of certain income tax and GST certificates with the Federal Court. The Service is having ongoing discussions with the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) about providing this service.
The Service also enhanced its website and continues to comply with Common Look and Feel and the Proactive Disclosures.

New workstations have been prepared to be deployed at the public counters across the country. New features such as viewing the hearing list, accessing the decision database and indexing information will be accessible to the public via these computers.

Strategic Integrated Management

This past fiscal year was marked by significant organizational change, with Regional Operations and Registry Services united under one branch. In addition, all corporate services activities were merged together. This new structure, consistent with our Program Activity Architecture, will allow for improved accountability and more efficient integrated resource planning. 

After the review of our Program Activity Architecture, we began the initial work on the development of our Performance Management Framework to be completed in 2007-2008.

Security Services

The Service continues to maintain its commitment and efforts to improving the security of judges, prothonotaries, staff and members of the public using its facilities and to ensure the protection of assets and information. 

Furthermore, in order to comply with the Government Security Policy, the Service is continuing with the implementation of electronic access control systems in its offices.
The Security Services Division in consultation with the various working groups continues to develop several policies and procedures relating to the protection of employees, assets and information.

The Service continues to develop its program aimed at heightening security awareness throughout the organization.  Some of the activities this year included the production of a brochure entitled “Emergency Procedures and Safeguards” as well as several activities during Security Awareness Week.

The Service developed its Business Continuity Planning (BCP) Program to ensure the continued availability of essential services, programs and operations, in the event of interruptions caused by unforeseen events such as extended power failures, severe weather conditions, etc.  The Program includes a BCP Policy, Business Impact Analysis which identifies our critical services and establishes priorities, BCP Plans for each sector and region, and a Pandemic Annex for the organization.  Testing and validation of the Plans will start with a Tabletop Exercise which is planned for early in 2007-08 and will be updated on a regular basis.

Facilities Management

The accommodation space optimization projects review continues to focus on all facilities. The Toronto Federal Judicial Centre Project was part of that program and is now completed.  The drafting of Judicial/Quasi-judicial Fit-up Standards has been undertaken, including a review of court standards, which is still at the development stage.

Offices of the Courts Administration Service

NATIONAL CAPITAL REGION OFFICES

Courts Administration Service PRINCIPAL OFFICE — OTTAWA 434 Queen Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 http://www.cas-satj.gc.ca

 

Lorne Building 90 Elgin Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 Registry of the Federal Court of Appeal and the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada Telephone:     (613) 996-6795 Facsimile:      (613) 952-7226 Registry of the Federal Court Telephone:     (613) 992-4238                      (613) 995-9177 (Immigration) Facsimile:      (613) 952-3653	Centennial Towers 200 Kent Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 Registry of the Tax Court of Canada Telephone:     (613) 992-0901  or                 1-800-927-5499 Facsimile:      (613) 957-9034 TTY:              (613) 943-0946 Tax Court of Canada, courtroom and Judges' chambers
Thomas D'Arcy McGee Building 90 Sparks Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 Federal Court of Appeal, Federal Court and Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada, courtrooms and Judges' chambers	434 Queen Street Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0H9 Corporate Services for the Courts Administration Service Telephone:     (613) 996-4778 Facsimile:     (613) 941-6197

LOCAL OFFICES

FCA -       Federal Court of Appeal
FC -         Federal Court
CMAC - Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada
TCC -      Tax Court of Canada

ALBERTA — Calgary 3rd Floor, 635 Eight Avenue S.W. P.O. Box 14, T2P 3M3 Telephone: FCA/CMAC (403) 292-5555 FC                (403) 292-5920 TCC              (403) 292-5556 Facsimile:       (403) 292-5329 TTY:              (403) 292-5879	ALBERTA — Edmonton 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 Facsimile:        (780) 495-4681 TTY:              (780) 495-2428
BRITISH COLUMBIA — Vancouver Pacific Centre, P.O. Box 10065 701 West Georgia Street V7Y 1B6 Telephone: FCA/CMAC (604) 666- 2055 FC                 (604) 666-3232 Facsimile:        (604) 666-8181 TTY:          (604) 666-9228 TCC          (604) 666-7987 Facsimile:         (604) 666-7967	MANITOBA — Winnipeg 4th Floor, 363 Broadway Street R3C 3N9 Telephone: FCA/CMAC      (204) 983-2232 FC                    (204) 983-2509 TCC                  (204) 983-1785 Facsimile:          (204) 983-7636 TTY:                 (204) 984-4440
NEW BRUNSWICK — Fredericton Suite 100, 82 Westmorland Street E3B 3L3 Telephone: FCA/CMAC  (506) 452-2036 FC         (506) 452-3016 TCC        (506) 452-2424 Facsimile:       (506) 452-3584 TTY:         (506) 452-3036	NOVA SCOTIA — Halifax Suite 1720, 1801 Hollis Street B3J 3N4 Telephone: FCA/CMAC      (902) 426-5326 FC                    (902) 426-3282 TCC                  (902) 426-5372 Facsimile:           (902) 426-5514 TTY:                   (902) 426-9776
ONTARIO — Toronto 1 — Registry of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada 180 Queen Street West, Suite 200, M5V 3L6 Telephone: FCA (416) 952-8006 Facsimile: FCA  (416) 973-2154 Telephone: FC   (416) 973-3356 Facsimile:  FC   (416) 954-5068 Telephone: CMAC (416)954-9823 Facsimile: CMAC (416)973-2154 TTY:       (416) 954-4245 Telephone: TCC (416) 973-9181 TCC      1-800-927-5499 Facsimile: TCC (416) 973-5944	2 — Registry of the Tax Court of Canada (London) 3rd Floor, 231 Dundas Street N6A 1H1 Telephone:      (519) 645-4203       1-800-927-5499 Facsimile:  (519) 675-3391
QUÉBEC — Montréal Registry of the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada 30 McGill Street H2Y 3Z7 Telephone: FCA/CMAC (514)283-5200 FC     514) 283-4820 TCC      (514) 283-9912 Or      1-800-927-5499 Facsimile: FCA/CMAC/FC (514) 283-6004 TCC       (514) 496-1996 TTY:       (514) 283-3017	QUÉBEC — Québec Palais de Justice, Room 500A, 300 Jean Lesage Blvd. G1K 8K6 Telephone:      FCA/CMAC                             (418) 648-4964 FC                   (418) 648-4820 TCC                (418) 648-7324 Facsimile:        (418) 648-4051 TTY:                (418) 648-4644

 

OFFICES STAFFED BY PROVINCIAL AND/OR TERRITORIAL COURT EMPLOYEES
NEW BRUNSWICK — Saint John Room 413, 110 Charlotte Street E2L 2J4 Telephone: (506) 636-4990 Facsimile: (506) 658-3070	NEWFOUNDLAND — St. John's The Court House, P.O. Box 937, Duckworth Street A1C 5M3 Telephone: (709) 772-2884 Facsimile: (709) 772-6351
NORTHWEST TERRITORIES — Yellowknife The Court House, P.O. Box 1320 4905, 49th Street X1A 2L9 Telephone: (867) 873-2044 Facsimile: (867) 873-0291	NUNAVUT— Iqaluit Nunavut Court of Justice Building Arnakallak (Building  #224) C. P. 297  X0A 0H0 Telephone: (867) 975-6100 Facsimile: (867) 979-6550
PRINCE EDWARD ISLAND — Charlottetown Sir Henry Louis Davies Law Courts P.O. Box 2000, 42 Water Street C1A 8B9 Telephone: (902) 368-0179 Facsimile: (902) 368-0266	SASKATCHEWAN — Saskatoon The Court House 520 Spadina Crescent East S7K 2H6 Telephone: (306) 975-4509 Facsimile: (306) 975-4818
SASKATCHEWAN — Regina The Court House 2425 Victoria Avenue S4P 3V7 Telephone: (306) 780-5268 Facsimile: (306) 787-7217	YUKON TERRITORY — Whitehorse Andrew A. Phillipsen Law Centre 2134 Second Avenue Y1A 5H6 Telephone: (867) 667-5441 Facsimile: (867) 393-6212

Table 7: Details on Project Spending

 (in $ thousands).

	Current Estimated Total Cost	Actual 2004–05	Actual 2005–06	2006–07
				Main Estimates	Planned Spending	Total Authorities	Actual
Corporate Services
Electronic Services(initial phase in 2006/07)1	2,578	0	0	0	0	0	789
Toronto Federal Judicial Centre (completed ) 2&3	4,048	N/A	269	4,512	4,512	4,512	3,779

Notes:

(1)       The Service has decided to internally absorb the costs to start this project. However, the Service can not continue to divert funding to this project from other critical areas of the organization and will thus seek Treasury Board approval for additional funding to modernize its electronic and technological infrastructure. All costs include Employee Benefit Plans.
(2)       An adjustment to all the courtroom dais’ to be completed in 2007-08.
(3)       It should be noted that since the Toronto project was completed under budget, the Service requested approval from Treasury Board Secretariat to use the remaining funding to amalgamate two former warehouse locations into one Gatineau warehouse.