Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat
www.tbs-sct.gc.ca
Common menu bar links
Breadcrumb Trail
ARCHIVED - Courts Administration Service
This page has been archived.
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 on the "Contact Us" page.
Chief Administrator's Message
This 2010-2011 Report on Plans and Priorities demonstrates the continued commitment of the Courts Administration Service ("the Service") to the provision of excellent service to the four separate and independent federal superior courts of record it supports and their clients, while safeguarding the independence of the Courts from the executive branch of government.
Our priorities continue to focus on people, technology and sound management practices. These are crucial to maintaining the level and types of support to the Canadian judiciary and litigants that have brought the Service international recognition for quality and efficiency. The investment in excellence we have made on behalf of Canadians also benefits our international partners, which include courts and their representatives from countries such as the Ukraine.
The Service continues to respond to the changing expectations of both litigants and the judiciary by renewing its service delivery and taking advantage of new technologies wherever possible. Clients and the judges increasingly expect to have automated tools and methods at their disposal: clients for the purpose of interacting with the Courts, and the judges for the discharge of their judicial functions.
To meet these expectations, the Service continues to pursue its service improvement initiatives, to embrace current technologies, to set high performance standards and to invest in the infrastructure to support these initiatives. Investing in the people who provide the services to our clients is critical; we need to continue to attract, train and retain those with the skills and experience required to meet our mandate. Finally, to ensure that we manage in an effective and accountable manner, the Service is reinforcing its planning and accountability frameworks and adding new capabilities.
As we enter the next phase of our development, the challenges facing the Service are both old and new. We must maintain our traditionally high levels of service delivery to the judiciary, the users of the courts and the public, while concurrently modernizing our processes and technologies with limited resources. This challenge is being met with a superior effort from our highly skilled and committed workforce - the results achieved have been truly remarkable. New technologies present even greater challenges in changing the way we provide services, requiring that we update our skills as we implement these initiatives.
I commend the dedication of the employees who make up the Service and present to the Canadian people the plans and priorities of the Courts Administration Service for fiscal year 2010-11.
Raymond P. Guenette
Section I – Overview
Raison d'être and Responsibilities
The Courts Administration Service (CAS) was established on July 2, 2003 with the coming into force of the Courts Administration Service Act, S.C. 2002, c. 8 (the Act). The Act served to amalgamate the former registries and corporate services of the Federal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. The Courts were created 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 role of the Service is to provide effective and efficient registry, judicial and corporate services to four superior Courts of record - the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court, the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada and the Tax Court of Canada. Judicial independence is enhanced through the Act by placing the judiciary at arm's length from the federal government while ensuring greater accountability for the use of public money.
The provision of consolidated administrative and registry services to multiple courts by an entity at arm's length from the executive branch of the government is internationally recognized as a best practice. The Service has been actively participating in several international judicial exchange programs and regularly hosts foreign delegations seeking to benefit from the Canadian experience.
The Service recognizes the independence of each Court in the conduct of its affairs while harmonizing administrative and registry services wherever possible. The Chief Administrator works closely with the four Chief Justices to achieve the appropriate balance.
The Functions of the Service
- providing the judiciary, litigants and counsel with services relating to court hearings;
- informing litigants about rules of practice, court directives and procedures;
- maintaining court records;
- acting as liaison between the judiciary, the legal profession and lay litigants;
- processing documents filed by or issued to litigants;
- recording all proceedings;
- serving as the entity where individuals seeking enforcement of decisions made by the courts and federal administrative tribunals, such as the Canada Industrial Relations Board and the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, may file pertinent documents;
- providing judges, prothonotaries and staff with library services, appropriate facilities and security; and
- providing support services to the judiciary.
To facilitate accessibility to the Courts by parties, the Service has approximately 630 employees in ten (10) permanent offices in Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Quebec, Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta and British Columbia. In addition, registry services and courtrooms in other locations are provided through agreements with provincial and territorial partners in Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, New Brunswick, Saskatchewan, Nunavut, the Northwest Territories and Yukon.
Strategic Outcome and Program Activity Architecture
In its Program Activity Architecture (PAA), the Service has one strategic outcome supported by three Program Activities. These Program Activities mirror the organizational structure of the Service:
COURTS ADMINISTRATION SERVICE
| STRATEGIC OUTCOME | |
|---|---|
The public has timely and fair access 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 |
|
|
|
THREE PROGRAM ACTIVITIES |
|
Registry Services |
Judicial Services |
Provision of Registrar Services – Federal Court of Appeal, Court Martial Appeal Court of
Canada, Federal Court and Tax Court of Canada |
Judicial Executives Services |
Internal Services |
|
Management and Oversight Services |
|
Planning Summary
| 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 |
|---|---|---|
| 59.7 | 59.7 | 59.7 |
| 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 |
|---|---|---|
| 615 | 615 | 615 |
| Performance Indicators | Targets |
|---|---|
| Satisfaction rate with CAS regarding access among parties participating in the judicial process | Surveys of clients and the judiciary - 85% satisfaction rate |
| Measurement of indicators will begin in 2010-2011. ($ millions) |
| Program Activity 1 | Forecast Spending 2009-10 |
Planned Spending | Alignment to Government of Canada Outcomes | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010-11 | 2012-12 | 2012-13 | |||
| Registry Services | 26.8 | 24.6 | 24.6 | 24.6 | The Service supports the federal judiciary which is an essential component of the federal system of governance. As such, its contributions affect several of the broad outcome areas including economic affairs, social affairs, international affairs and government affairs. |
| Judicial Services |
21.2 | 18.9 | 18.9 | 18.9 | |
| Internal Services | 18.5 | 16.2 | 16.2 | 16.2 | |
| Total Planned Spending | 66.5 | 59.7 | 59.7 | 59.7 | |
Please see Departmental Spending Trend for changes between fiscal years.
1. For program activity descriptions, please access the Main Estimates online at http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/est-pre/20092010/me-bd/JUS-eng.asp#bm05
Contribution of Priorities to Strategic Outcome(s)
| Operational Priorities | Type | Links to Strategic Outcome(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Service Improvement Initiatives | Ongoing | This priority contributes directly to the sole Strategic Outcome of the Service: The public has timely and fair access 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. |
The Service will continue to pursue a range of initiatives that focus on significant
changes and improvements to the way it provides services to its clients, the judiciary and litigants. |
| Management Priorities | Type | Links to Strategic Outcome(s) | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Investment in our People | New | This priority contributes directly to the sole Strategic Outcome of the Service: The public has timely and fair access 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. |
The public has timely and fair access 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. The Service constantly reviews and assesses its workforce and workplace practices to achieve its goal of a knowledgeable,
well-trained, engaged and productive workforce - providing Canadians with a high level of service to ensure their
ongoing trust and satisfaction. |
| Strengthened Planning and Accountability | Ongoing | This priority contributes directly to the sole Strategic Outcome of the Service: The public has timely and fair access 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. |
The Service has reviewed its planning and accountability capacity and has embarked on
a process to formalize and strengthen certain key internal management practices, including improved evidenced‑based
decision-making, reporting and accountability. |
Risk Analysis
Operating Environment
As e-technologies become the standard in most operating environments, including the judicial context, the Service recognizes
the need to meet the expectations of the judiciary and litigants. The investment required presents a significant challenge
to the Service, which must rationalize existing resources for ongoing operations while identifying and dedicating new resources
to change the service delivery model. Throughout this period of significant transition, the Service will continue to focus
on service excellence to the judiciary and the public. Essential to success will be a positive work environment that supports
people with the right skills and experience.
Risk Management
The Service is in the process of developing a formal risk management framework for planning and decision making throughout
its operations. Risk analysis and related mitigation strategies are being finalized for communication across the organization
and will be reviewed and updated on a regular basis.
Physical and Information Technology (IT) Security
An adequate level of security is fundamental to the effective functioning of the system of justice. The physical security
of the premises and the protection of judges, staff and other participants in the court process involves addressing significant
and increasing risks. There is a critical need for the Service to provide standardized security measures across the country,
not only for dedicated court facilities, but also for the borrowed or rented facilities used when hearings are held in smaller
centres. The Service has developed a National Security Strategy to address these and a range of other security requirements,
including IT network security. Obtaining the necessary resources to implement the Strategy is a priority for the organization.
Information Management
Management of the Service's paper and electronic records is a significant challenge due to the nature of the organization
and the courts it supports. Court records are extensive and require significant resources to create, manage and store. The
Service is currently rationalizing its retention and disposal schedules in accordance with Government of Canada guidelines,
and is digitizing records where capacity and resources allow. Development of a more robust information management model
is underway; this will include strategies for the safe keeping of records, a critical building block in the increasing use
of information technology in the Registry and the courtrooms.
People
Attracting and retaining employees is a significant challenge for the Service. The organization relies on highly specialized,
qualified and engaged employees. Many of the skills required are unique to the judicial or quasi-judicial environment, and
the demands on staff are high. Management is responding to key issues identified in the most recent Public Service Employee
Survey through a series of initiatives to improve the workplace and develop the workforce - these are described in the Management
Priorities section above. They include a focus on managers and their capacity to effectively support and develop employees
including learning and career development, and addressing workplace issues around harassment and discrimination, diversity
and values and ethics.
Resources / Capacity
The Service is facing significant challenges with respect to its capacity and the resources required to provide the infrastructure
needed to move forward on a variety of initiatives. Investments in this regard have been identified as being essential to
strengthen that capacity. Plans that clearly identify requirements, deliverables and timelines have been elaborated to ensure
priorities are addressed as resources permit. The Service will attempt to secure funding for these important initiatives:
however it will implement its plans to ensure that the operational excellence of the Courts is maintained.
Opportunities
Security and Integrity of the Courts in the NCR
The Service continues to pursue its objective of concentrating the majority of its offices in the National Capital Region
(NCR) in the Thomas D'Arcy McGee (TDM) building over the coming years, as space becomes available. The TDM building has
been identified by Public Works and Government Services Canada as the long-term accommodation solution for the Service.
This will result in improved effectiveness and efficiency of courts and registry operations, support the modernization of
the courts and the Registry, help ensure the continuity of court business, contribute to improved security of staff, judges
and litigants, and help improve employee morale.
Technology / Service Improvement
As mentioned in previous Estimates documents and annual reports, the Service is pursuing its service improvement initiatives
through the implementation and integration of new technologies. Upgrading technological infrastructure and information management
capacity will support increased use of digital audio recording, videoconferencing, electronic filing, and scanning and electronic
storage of documents. The ultimate objective is to provide judges and Registry staff with electronic access to all documents
within a given court file. Another is to establish "e-courtrooms" that make full use of computers, access to the Internet,
evidence management software and other related court technologies.
The Service will move to achieve this ambitious objective in a planned and measured way, ensuring the physical IT infrastructure
is in place, with related business and corporate resources available to support the rollout of these technologies. The consolidation
of office space in the TDM building affords an opportunity to upgrade existing courtrooms to allow for the necessary technical
infrastructure to be put in place.
Planning and Accountability
To strengthen planning throughout the organization, management has endorsed an integrated approach. Current initiatives
include the renewal of the internal audit function, finalizing the implementation of a risk management framework, strengthened
operational planning, the intent to create a project management office as well as the provision of organization-wide training
in project management. The result will be better evidenced‑based decision-making and accountability throughout the Service.
Expenditure Profile
Departmental Spending Trend
Notes:
Some major variances between years are explained in more detail below. However, other items that cause variations from year
to year include: increases or decreases in the annual operating budget carry forward, paylist shortfalls, Employee Benefit
Plan percentages (EBP) application rates, certain program integrity funding issues, as well as the government-wide cuts
from Procurement Reform and compensation for newly signed collective agreements.
2007-2008:
Major variations between 2007-2008 and 2006-2007 are mainly due to:
- $4.5M decrease in sunset funding for fit-up requirements for CAS' Federal Judicial Centre (FJC) accommodation in Toronto
- $0.3M decrease in sunset funding to address Short-term Immigration Pressures to reduce inventory of citizenship grant
and proof applications as well as sponsored parents and grandparent applications
2008-2009:
Major variations between 2008-2009 and 2007-2008 are mainly due to:
+ $3.5M increase in funding for collective agreement compensation
+ $2.2M increase in funding to implement Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
+ $1.3M increase in funding for the relocation of employees within the National Capital Region to 90 Sparks Street, Ottawa
- $0.8M decrease in funding for Program Integrity issues
2009-2010:
Major variations between 2009-2010 and 2008-2009 are mainly due to:
- $2.3M decrease in funding for Program Integrity issues
- $1.3M decrease in sunset funding for the relocation of employees within the National Capital Region to 90 Sparks Street,
Ottawa
- $0.3M decrease in sunset funding to implement the Public Service Modernization Act
+ $0.3M increase in funding for collective agreement compensation
+ $1.5M increase in funding to implement Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act
2010-2011:
Major variations between 2010-11 and 2009-2010 are mainly due to:
- $3.7M decrease in sunset funding to implement Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Immigration and Refugee Protection
Act
- $2.2M decrease as no amount is included for the operating budget carry forward
- $1.3M decrease as no amount is included for paylist shortfalls
- $0.3M decrease as no amount of compensation for newly signed collective agreements is included in planned spending
| Vote # or Statutory Item (S) | Truncated Vote or Statutory Wording | 2009-10 Main Estimates |
2010-11 Main Estimates |
|---|---|---|---|
| 30 | Operating expenditures | 55.0 | 53.3 |
| (S) | Contributions to employee benefit plans | 6.1 | 6.4 |
| Total | 61.1 | 59.7 | |
The $1.4M variance between the two years is mainly due to:
- $3.6M decrease in sunset funding in 2009-2010 to implement Bill C-3, an Act to amend the Immigration and
Refugee Protection Act
+ $2.5M collective bargaining and associated Employee Benefit Plans
